extended

exported

update_date

trump-aid-puerto-rico

trump-aid-puerto-rico

A social media meme accurately lists U.S. government assets deployed by President Trump to aid Puerto Ricans in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria.

In the wake of public criticism of the Trump administration’s response to the devastation wrought by Hurricane Maria in Puerto Rico in late 2017 as “inadequate” (among other things), a post widely shared via social media endeavored to make the opposite case, namely that President Trump deployed a massive amount of government assets to address the disaster: The basic text, which began making the rounds on 27 September, states the following: < President Trump has dispatched 140 helicopters, 28 ships, 6 Army field hospitals, 3 Navy Seabee Battalions, 5 US Army Combat Engineer Battalions, 3 Civil Affairs battalions, 2 Nuclear Submarines capable of generating 2.8 Gigawatts of Power, released 300,000 tons of food, medical supplies and water from Military stocks. > We were unable to trace the figures to any official source, nor do we know who compiled them. We can say, however, based on actual facts and figures shared by FEMA and the Department of Defense (DoD), that the stated numbers range from inflated to downright fictional. 140 Helicopters Mixture. Based on United States Department of Defense statements, dozens of helicopters have been deployed to Puerto Rico, though the actual number is far less than 140. On 27 September (the same day the meme began circulating), DoD announced an “acceleration” of Puerto Rico relief efforts including the deployment of the amphibious assault ship USS Wasp, whose complement of rotary-wing aircraft would bring the total number of helicopters in use there to 52. 28 Ships Mixture. By our count, using figures released by the DoD and U.S. Coast Guard, the total number of U.S. Navy and Coast Guard ships deployed to Puerto Rico is 18 (though an unknown number of non-military ships are also in use). Counting the USNS Comfort, a 1,000 bed hospital ship scheduled to dock in the disaster zone on 4 October, the arrival of the USS Wasp will bring the total number of U.S. Navy ships deployed to five (including the USS Kearsage and USS Oak Hill, both conducting search and rescue flights, aerial damage assessments, logistics support and route clearance on and around the island, and the SS Wright, tasked with delivering 1.1 million meals and one million liters of water). According to the U.S. Coast Guard, 13 of its cutters have been performing search and rescue missions and delivering supplies. An unspecified number of commercial ships are also participating in the aid effort. 6 Army Field Hospitals Mostly false. We’ve found no evidence, either in press reports or statements from DoD or FEMA, that Army field hospitals are in use in Puerto Rico, though that doesn’t mean no medical help is being supplied. Emergency medical services are being provided not by Army field hospitals, but by U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) personnel assigned to support the efforts of doctors at fully or partially functional hospitals around Puerto Rico, as well as five “federal medical stations” set up near those facilities. 3 Navy Seabee Battalions, 5 US Army Combat Engineer Battalions, 3 Civil Affairs battalions Mostly true. According to press reports there are Seabees and members of the Army Corps of Engineers now on the ground in Puerto Rico, but we’ve seen no announcements supporting the numbers specified above. Although DoD officials have not released a breakdown of the various military forces thus far deployed to Puerto Rico, Gov. Ricardo Rossello said there were roughly 7,200 U.S. military personnel on the ground as of 2 October, according to a DoD press release, in addition to an estimated 3,000 non-military federal employees, for a total of more than 10,000 government workers involved in relief efforts. 2 Nuclear Submarines False. It is not the case that two nuclear submarines were sent to provide emergency electricity to Puerto Ricans. A reported 95 percent of the island’s 3.4 million inhabitants were still without power as of 2 October, according to local officials. FEMA reported distributing and setting up more than 300 emergency generators since the disaster, but most of that effort was devoted to restoring power to hospitals and other critical facilities. Using nuclear submarines to supply emergency power in disaster areas has been proposed, but never tried. In 1982, the USS Indianapolis was deployed to Kauai, Hawaii in the aftermath of Hurricane Iwa, a solution both Navy and civilian officials said would have been technically feasible, though the plan was ultimately abandoned in favor of using a portable generator to “jump start” the island’s main power plant. No such “nuclear option” has been proposed in the case of Puerto Rico. 300,000 Tons of Food, Medical supplies and Water Mostly true. We have not found the above (or any) overall total tonnage stated in any official sources, but vast amounts of food and supplies have either arrived or are on their way to Puerto Rico. According to FEMA, more than two million meals and 2.5 million litres of water have reached the island and been distributed, plus medical equipment, generators, gasoline, and other supplies, with more coming. For more information, see FEMA’s daily-updated overview of federal government efforts on behalf of the citizens of Puerto Rico.

Davis, Aaron, Lamothe, Dan and O’Keefe, Ed.  “U.S. Response in Puerto Rico Pales Next to Actions After Haiti Quake.”    The Washington Post.   28 September 2017.;Dickstein, Corey.   “Pentagon Adding USS Wasp to Puerto Rico Response, USNS Comfort Departs for Island.”    Stars and Stripes.   29 September 2017.;Garamone, Jim.   “Unified Coordination Group Addressing Puerto Rico Recovery, Governor Says.”    U.S. Dept. of Defense.   2 October 2017.;Hernandez, Arelis R., Lamothe, Dan, O’Keefe, Ed and Achenbach, Joel.   “Trump Administration Rushes Military Assets to Puerto Rico Amid Growing Crisis.”    The Washington Post.   27 September 2017.;Starr, Barbara, Cohen, Zachary and Browne, Ryan.   “U.S. Military Sends Ships, Aircraft to Puerto Rico.”    CNN.   26 September 2017.;Werner, Ben.   “Pentagon: Hospital Ship USNS Comfort Prepares to Depart for Puerto Rico.”    USNI News.   26 September 2017.;FEMA.   “Overview of Federal Efforts to Prepare for and Respond to Hurricane Maria.”    2 October 2017.;Reuters.   “Factbox: Relief Efforts in Puerto Rico After Hurricane Maria.”    29 September 2017.;UPI.   “Navy Seeks to Return Power to Stricken Hawaii Island.”    29 November 1982.;U.S. Dept. of Health and Human Services.   “HHS Augments Medical Care at Hospitals in Puerto Rico Impacted by Hurricane Maria.”    30 September 2017.

man-mowed-lawn-tornado

man-mowed-lawn-tornado

A photograph shows a man mowing his lawn during a tornado.

In early June 2017, a photograph appeared showing an astonishing tableau — a tornado raging on the horizon while a man calmly mowed his yard in the foreground: This photograph may seem unbelievable at first glance, but we have no reason to believe that it has been doctored. It was originally shared on Facebook by Three Hills, Alberta resident Cecilia Wessels on 2 June 2017, along with the following post: < My beast mowing the lawn with a breeze in his hair. > The “beast” is apparently her husband Theunis Wessels, and the photograph was taken in their backyard in the town of Three Hills, Alberta, Canada. Wessels responded to several comments on her Facebook page, insisting that the image was indeed real. The Wessels also spoke to Canadian network CBC, and noting that as alarming as the photograph might be, the tornado is nowhere near as close as it appears in the picture: < Theunis Wessels says the tornado was actually much further away than it appears in the photo, and that it was moving away from them. […] “I literally took the picture to show my mum and dad in South Africa, ‘Look there’s a tornado,’ and now everyone is like, ‘Why is your husband mowing the lawn?”‘ Cecilia Wessels said Saturday. “Our whole street, everyone was on their back patios taking pictures,” she added. Theunis Wessels said he was keeping watch of his surroundings and saw the twister form as the swirling connected from the sky and the ground to form the funnel. […] “It looks much closer if you look in the photo, but it was really far away. Well, not really far, far away, but it was far away from us,” he said. “I was keeping an eye on it.” > A tornado did touch down in Three Hills. Vance Neudorf captured footage of the same tornado as it passed by a field. Another man who is perhaps standing a little too close to this twister can be seen at the end of the following clip:

CBC.  “Man Who Mowed Lawn with Tornado Behind Him Says he ‘Was Keeping an Eye on it.'”   4 June 2017.;Carr, Ada.  “Man Casually Mows His Lawn as Tornado Swirls Behind Him in Viral Photo.”   The Weather Channel.  4 June 2017.

coach-refuse-kaepernick-phone-call-trump

coach-refuse-kaepernick-phone-call-trump

NFL coach Bill Belichick reversed his decision to sign quarterback Colin Kaepernick after a phone call with President Trump.

Today’s lesson: Be skeptical of names that are spelled with numbers. Rumors holding that New England Patriots coach Bill Belichick reversed a decision to sign National Football League quarterback Colin Kaepernick after a phone call with President Donald Trump quickly traveled around social media, after a spoof Twitter account posing as ESPN reporter Adam Shefter posted the following tweets: These tweets were not sent by Adam Schefter’s genuine Twitter account (located at @AdamSchefter). Colin Kaepernick filed a lawsuit against the NFL in October 2017, alleging that team owners had colluded to keep him out of the league because he protested against police brutality and social inequality by kneeling during the national anthem, sparking waves of protests and ongoing discussions about free speech. A common trolling tactic on Twitter is to create an account that slightly alters the Twitter handle of a well-known personality. In this case, the @AddamScheft3r account added an extra “d” to the name and replaced an “E” with a “3.” These small changes can easily be missed by social media users skimming through their feeds. Although this spoof account fooled many people at first blush, it does provide several hints about its lack of authenticity. The profile, for instance, simply read “made you look.” The account also posted a tweet warning people about fake accounts: At the time of this writing, the tweet admitting that the account was fake had 0 retweets. By comparison, the tweet claiming that the Patriots had signed Kaepernick had dozens. Shortly after this article was published, the fake Adam Schefter account was deleted and replaced with an account mimicking Pro Football Talk’s Twitter account. The spoof account employed the same tactic, replacing a letter with a number, to make it appear as if the tweets came from the genuine account. In this case, the “o” in “Pro” was replaced with a zero:

Neuman, Scott.  “Kaepernick Files Grievance Saying NFL, Owners Conspired To Shut Him Out.”   NPR.  16 October 2017.

did-barack-obamas-stylist-reveal-he-is-a-gay

did-barack-obamas-stylist-reveal-he-is-a-gay

Former President Barack Obama's stylist revealed to a conservative web site that he caught Obama in the middle of a gay tryst.

In September 2017, the misinformation web site The Last Line of Defense concocted a particularly coarse smear story concerning former United States President Barack Obama that further challenged even its own basement-level standards for “satire”: < Barack Obama’s personal stylist has spoken out about something he witnessed when he was working in the White House. “What I saw will forever haunt my nightmares,” Rubio DesCartes told TheBlaze in an interview Thursday. DesCartes says that on July 8 2011, he went to do his job as normal, but when he found Barack Obama he wasn’t alone. “He was naked with another man, a White House intern, in the Reagan Bedroom,” DesCartes says. “The President was bent over a dresser and the intern was, well, you can guess what was happening. When they heard me come in, they both jumped.” > The story also contained another regurgitation of a transphobic slur against former First Lady Michelle Obama, and closed with this line: < We now know for sure: Barack Obama is a gay. > The story is a fabrication. The site itself contains a disclaimer stating that this story — as well as everything else it publishes — is completely made up: < DISCLAIMER: America’s Last Line of Defense is a satirical publication that may sometimes appear to be telling the truth. We assure you that’s not the case. We present fiction as fact and our sources don’t actually exist. Names that represent actual people and places are purely coincidental and all images should be considered altered and do not in any way depict reality. In other words, if you believe this crap you’re a real dumbass. > However, the story has been republished verbatim on other dubious sites like Specialon, which contains no such disclaimer.

malia-obama-harvard

malia-obama-harvard

In August 2017, Harvard University reversed its suspension of Malia Obama, after an intervention by Barack Obama.

On 14 August 2017, the satirical web site Our Land of the Free falsely reported that former United States president Barack Obama had intervened to reverse Harvard University’s suspension of his daughter Malia Obama: < If you haven’t heard, Malia Obama was recently arrested in Chicago after purchasing a whopping six pounds of marijuana (a seller’s quantity according to police) from a drug lord her father had released from prison in 2015. The teenage Obama faces a good bit of time in prison and has even been suspended from Harvard until the conclusion of the trial, but the regular course of justice is not acceptable to the Obama family. According to sources within Harvard, Barack Obama called school president Harmon Finklestein and angrily demanded that his daughter be allowed to attend the university. Of course, he caved. > The article then presents a fabricated quotation from the president of Harvard University.  The story is entirely false: Malia Obama was not arrested in Chicago, she has not been suspended from Harvard, she is not facing trial, and the president of Harvard University is Drew Gilpin Faust, not the fictional “Harmon Finklestein”. This is just the latest in a series of fabricated, fake stories revolving around Malia Obama, which has included false claims that she lost an internship following her (fictional) arrest, and that she had been expelled from Harvard. Our Land of the Free is a satirical web site that describes itself as publishing exclusive fake stories: < …We make no guarantee that what you read here is true. In fact, it most definitely is not. Our Land Of The Free is here to entertain you with the kind of whimsical satire conservatives enjoy. >

sexual-assault-pre-existing

sexual-assault-pre-existing

Rape would be designated a pre-existing condition under the American Health Care Act.

Prior to the passage of the American Health Care Act in the U.S. House of Representatives on 4 May 2017, critics warned that the bill would specifically put sexual assault and rape survivors at risk because it would list their circumstances as being “pre-existing conditions” subject to either price gouging or disqualification from healthcare insurance providers. After it was passed, those concerns only increased. Jodi Omear, a spokesperson for the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network survivor advocacy group released a statement: < Sexual assault should never be considered a pre-existing condition. Every 98 seconds an American is sexually assaulted. The effects of sexual violence are long lasting and it’s important that we stay clear of any barriers that allow survivors to get help, report crimes, and receive medical treatment. We must create a system where more survivors feel comfortable and confident coming forward. > Neither sexual assault nor rape were named in the legislation, which critics have dubbed “Trumpcare.” The concern stemmed in part from an amendment to the bill, which allows states to apply for waivers on an ACA mandate requiring insurers to provide coverage for several “essential” services. Author and freelance journalist Linda Tirado called the concern on the part of sexual assault victims a “visceral fear;” in a string of tweets after the bill passed, Tirado related an encounter with a woman who told her she had been raped but did not report it and was concerned about the potential effect on her health care: < This is how quick that impact goes. Not even to the Senate yet and people are worried the state will find out about their vaginal abrasion. > The amendment was crafted by Rep. Mark Meadows (R-North Carolina) and Rep. Tom MacArthur (R-New Jersey). Attempts to reach their respective Washington D.C. offices following the bill’s passage were unsuccessful. A spokesperson for the health insurer trade group America’s Health Insurance Plans, Kristine Grow, told us: < Our position is, of course survivors of domestic abuse and rape should be covered. From a legislative perspective, both the Affordable Care Act and the NAIC Model Act prohibit discrimination against these survivors when making a coverage determination. Health plans comply with laws implementing both. > The latter document Grow named was created in 1999 by the National Association of Insurance Commissioners, and prohibits “unfair discrimination by health carriers and insurance professionals on the basis of abuse status.” By February 2014, a majority of states had enacted provisions similar to the NAIC’s legislation. For example, Florida law says: < A health insurer, life insurer, disability insurer, or managed care provider may refuse to underwrite, issue, or renew a policy based on the applicant’s medical condition, but may not consider whether such condition was caused by an act of abuse. For purposes of this section, the term “abuse” means the occurrence of one or more of the following acts: a. Attempting or committing assault, battery, sexual assault, or sexual battery; b. Placing another in fear of imminent serious bodily injury by physical menace; c. False imprisonment; d. Physically or sexually abusing a minor child; or e. An act of domestic violence as defined in s. 741.28. > As of May 2017, 42 states had enacted provisions similar to those described NAIC model acts while another six (Kansas, Mississippi, Nebraska, New Mexico, Rhode Island, and Tennessee) had outright adopted an NAIC model. Tirado told us the debate over whether the AHCA would turn rape into a pre-existing condition is a “linguistic” one: < When you think about the fact that you don’t have all of those things happen — trauma and bruising and bleeding and also STD checks and also have to have a full battery [of tests], those things happen pretty rarely in the course of a day-to-day existence that doesn’t involve that kind of violence. The question is actually what is the effect going to be and not what is the stated intent. > A 2009 Huffington Post report found evidence that rape victims were, indeed, being denied coverage in the wake of their assault: < A 38-year-old woman in Ithaca, N.Y., said she was raped last year and then penalized by insurers because in giving her medical history she mentioned an assault she suffered in college 17 years earlier. The woman, Kimberly Fallon, told a nurse about the previous attack and months later, her doctor’s office sent her a bill for treatment. She said she was informed by a nurse and, later, the hospital’s billing department that her health insurance company, Blue Cross Blue Shield, not only had declined payment for the rape exam, but also would not pay for therapy or medication for trauma because she “had been raped before.” Fallon says she now has trouble getting coverage for gynecological exams. To avoid the hassle of fighting with her insurance company, she goes to Planned Parenthood instead and pays out of pocket. > At the time, a different AHIP spokesperson said that insurers ordinarily would not know if an applicant had been sexually assaulted, but that if someone developed post-traumatic stress disorder in the wake of an attack, it “could be a factor” in their being denied coverage.

Ivory, Danielle.  “Rape Victim’s Choice: Risk AIDS or Health Insurance?”   Huffington Post.  18 March 2010.;Aron-Dine, Avia et al.  “Amendment Fixes None of House Bill’s Underlying Problems.”   Center on Budget and Policy Priorities.   27 April 2017.;Scaramella, Gina.  “Health ‘Reform’ Will Make Sexual Assault Survivors Sick.”   The Hill.  3 May 2017.

joel-osteen-flood-tithing

joel-osteen-flood-tithing

David Mikkelson

Joel Osteen's Houston megachurch provided shelter only to the church's top financial contributors

After torrential flooding hit parts of Texas in the wake of Hurricane Harvey in August 2017, Joel Osteen, the celebrity pastor of Lakewood Church in Houston, was assailed by claims that he had refused to open his megachurch facility to those seeking refuge from floodwaters that had engulfed the city. On 30 August 2017, the Action News 3 web site published an article reporting that Osteen had finally opened his church to flood victims, but that he was checking tithing records and only taking in (or giving priority to) church members who had made the greatest financial contributions: < Lakewood Church was under fire after apparently not opening up the church to flood victims. The church disputed online criticism, stating “We are prepared to shelter people once the cities and county shelters reach capacity.” “Victoria and I care deeply about our fellow Houstonians. Lakewood’s doors are open and we are receiving anyone who needs shelter,” Osteen tweeted Tuesday, referencing his wife who is also Lakewood’s co-pastor. However, on Wednesday, reports from flood victims say the church is following a strict “members only” guideline, taking top church contributors ahead of people on the lower giving scale. Single mother Tiana Williams said she waited in line for 3 hours, just to be given a numbered ticket and told to check back in a few hours. “When I got to the entrance with my two little boys, they asked for my name and entered it into the computer,” said Williams. “Then, I was told that there were over 2,000 people ahead of me that have reserved beds! When I kept pressuring the guy to tell me why I had to wait, he said they were under strict guidelines to check tithing records of members and number their bed reservations based on their 2016 giving. I just can’t believe this. I just can’t.” > This claim was false, a fabrication that originated with — and was reported only by — the ActionsNews3.com fake news web site. The only element of the article that was true was that Osteen had issued a tweet the previous day stating that Lakewood Church’s doors were open to those seeking shelter from the storm: < Victoria and I care deeply about our fellow Houstonians. Lakewood’s doors are open and we are receiving anyone who needs shelter. — Joel Osteen (@JoelOsteen) August 29, 2017 >

space-solar-eclipse-photograph

space-solar-eclipse-photograph

David Mikkelson

A photograph captures a solar eclipse as seen from space.

An image was commonly circulated online in mid-2012 that was billed as a photograph taken from space (via the International Space Station) of a 20 May 2012 solar eclipse visible from North America: < I refuse to believe this image of the eclipse is real, as much as I wish it were. Not that it couldn’t be real. It can. I’ve seen plenty of photos of eclipses taken from space, but this one is just too awesome to be real. > The image was not a photograph of that celestial event, however — or a photograph at all. It was purely a work of Digital/3-Dimensional Art that was posted to the DeviantART web site back in 2009.

texas-rape-insurance

texas-rape-insurance

In August 2017, the Texas House of Representatives passed a bill that would force women to purchase "rape insurance."

On 9 August 2017, the Groopspeak web site reported that the Texas House of Representatives had passed a bill that would force women to purchase “rape insurance.” < The most populous Republican state in the country, the good ole’ state of Texas, has just passed a bill in the House of Representatives that will essentially force women to buy rape insurance if they seek to have an abortion. Critics of the bill are calling it especially cruel and a detriment to women’s health in general. If put into law, the bill will take effect as soon as Dec. 1 and force women to buy supplemental plans if they wish to have abortions, even if induced by rape. > The article contained excerpts from a Reuters report that quotes Democratic State Representative Chris Turner as using the phrase “rape insurance”: < Women and parents will be faced with the horrific decision of having to purchase ‘rape insurance’ to cover them if they are victimized. This is not only ridiculous, but it is cruel. > The bill in question is House Bill 214. It was passed by the Texas House on 9 July 2017, and a similar bill is currently before the state Senate. If it’s passed there, it will be enacted on 1 December 2017. The bill would prohibit certain health insurance plans from covering abortions, but would allow women to purchase private supplementary insurance plans that would cover abortions. The bill applies to plans purchased through the Texas health benefit exchange that was set up by the Affordable Care Act, public employee health plans, and several other kinds of insurance. It allows an exception for medically urgent abortions (those deemed necessary to prevent a woman’s death or serious physical injury) but does not allow an exception for the termination of a pregnancy that arises from rape or incest or abortions where a fetal abnormality has been diagnosed. There are also certain exceptions of a more technical nature. The Texas House Research Office (HRO) published an analysis of the bill: < HB 214 would prohibit certain health insurance plans from providing coverage for an elective abortion. The bill would not prevent a person from purchasing optional or supplemental coverage for elective abortion under a health benefit plan other than a qualified health plan offered through a health benefit exchange. > The absence of an exception for rape and incest has proven to be the most controversial element of the bill. The HRO analysis articulates opponents’ rationale as follows: < The bill would not include an exception for insurance to cover abortion in the case of rape or incest. Before being faced with such a situation, a woman might not have thought she would need supplemental abortion insurance, which is one reason abortion coverage should not be excluded from basic health insurance plans. > The Groopspeak article’s headline is misleading — women would not be required to purchase additional insurance. However, abortions would no longer be covered in health insurance plans that are part of the Texas Obamacare exchange, meaning that women would be forced to purchase supplementary plans if they wanted to be insured for abortions. Secondly, the phrase “rape insurance” has only been used by the bill’s opponents as part of their opposition to the bill. While it’s true that women would have to purchase additional insurance to cover abortion in the case of rape, they would also have to purchase additional insurance in order to cover the cost of an abortion for almost any reason, including incest or a fetal abnormality. A more comprehensive and neutral description of this supplementary insurance would therefore be “abortion insurance,” remembering that the bill still allows across-the-board coverage for terminations deemed medically urgent.  Â

Herskovitz, Jon.  “Texas Bill Restricting Insurance Coverage for Abortions Nears Approval.”  Reuters.  9 August 2017.;Smithee, Rep. John.  “House Bill 214.”  Texas House of Representatives.  9 August 2017.;House Research Organization.  “Bill Analysis – H.B. 214.”  Texas House of Representatives.  8 August 2017.

rick-scott-critical-condition

rick-scott-critical-condition

On 11 September 2017, Florida Governor Rick Scott was taken to hospital after being injured during a Hurricane Irma cleanup operation.

On 11 September 2017, the “satirical” website Last Line of Defense falsely reported that Florida Governor Rick Scott was in critical condition after injuring himself during a Hurricane Irma cleanup operation. < Florida Governor Rick Scott was taken by Lifeflight to Mercy General In Sarasota this morning after taking part in a cleanup effort in his home town that went terribly wrong. Scott’s Chief of Staff, Morton Valdy, told Fox News: “Governor Scott was struck in the head with a ceramic roof tile this morning while helping a neighbor in his home town clear debris from his driveway. The tile fell from the neighbor’s roof and fwell [sic] nearly 30 feet before striking the Governor, knocking him unconscious.” > Morton Valdy made no such comments to Fox News, because Morton Valdy does not exist. Rick Scott’s chief-of-staff is, in fact, Jackie Schutz Zeckman. The story goes on to claim that President Donald Trump tweeted his condolences for the accident, something he never did, because the accident never took place. Like everything else published by the Last Line of Defense, this story is a complete fabrication. The web site describes itself as a “satirical publication” in this disclaimer: < America’s Last Line of Defense is a satirical publication that may sometimes appear to be telling the truth. We assure you that’s not the case. We present fiction as fact and our sources don’t actually exist. Names that represent actual people and places are purely coincidental and all images should be considered altered and do not in any way depict reality. >

Bousquet, Steve.  “Rick Scott Names Jackie Schutz Zeckman as New Chief of Staff.”  Tampa Bay Times.  16 May 2017.

nevada-gaming-denied-trump

nevada-gaming-denied-trump

Donald Trump's Las Vegas property is not a casino because the Nevada Gaming Commission refused Trump a gaming license and deemed him insufficiently "trustworthy."

Donald Trump the politician was a relatively new personality in 2016, as many people had already known him for years as a real estate mogul and reality television star.  His longtime presence in American pop culture made him an especially rich source of urban legends, misinformation, and memes. In February 2016, the above-reproduced an image-based rumor claimed that Trump’s Las Vegas hotel lacked a casino because the Nevada Gaming Commission had deemed Trump not “trustworthy” enough to qualify for one: We located one possible source for the claim in a 23 February 1987 New York Times article. According to piece, which was nearly 30 years old, Trump had difficulty in the 1980s with attempts to expand his empire west: < Last September Mr. Trump bought a 4.9 percent stake in the Holiday Corporation, which operates casinos in Atlantic City and Nevada. He sold the stake at a $35 million profit in November and bought into Bally. Mr. Trump recently applied for a Nevada casino license, but Paul Bible, chairman of the Nevada Gaming Commission at the time, said that Nevada regulators would look askance at any ”greenmailer” who hurts casino companies operating in Nevada by acquiring large quantities of stock in order to sell the stake back to the company at a premium. Mr. Trump’s sale of the Holiday shares was on the open market, after takeover rumors boosted the market price. In court papers filed for the Camden hearing, Mr. Trump’s lawyers denied that their client had invested in Bally for the purpose of selling to the company at a premium. ”Mr. Trump has never been, and is not presently, a greenmailer or corporate raider,” his counterclaim said. > Seventeen years later, Trump’s activity in Vegas again made headlines. A February 2004 Las Vegas Review-Journal article included information about the Nevada Gaming Commission’s view of Trump at the time: < Trump and his companies, Trump Hotels & Casino Resorts Inc. and the THCR Holding Corp., were required to be licensed by gaming regulators in Nevada after he purchased 358,000 shares of Riviera parent Riviera Holdings Corp. The purchase, made [in or around early 2003], put [Trump] over a threshold requiring investigation and licensure by Nevada gaming regulators. Trump and the other officers of his companies will appear at the Gaming Commission meeting in the capital on Feb. 19 for final approval. Gaming Control Board Chairman Dennis Neilander said the investigations of Trump and his executive team gave the board no need to ask any personal questions at the hearing. He called the applications “very clean” and said he was impressed with the backgrounds of some of Trump’s personnel. Members of the control board asked Trump and his executives about problems with minors gaining entry to his New Jersey properties, but Chief Operating Officer Mark Brown said the company is making every effort to control the problem. Trump has talked for years about moving into the Las Vegas casino industry, but his expected licensing by the end of the month will make it much easier to put deals together. > Later that month, the Associated Press reported that Trump was approved by Nevada state regulators to hold a stake in the Riviera hotel and casino: < The Gaming Commission approved Trump and companies that he controls as part of a registration and suitability-finding process that would speed up any actual casino licensing in the future. Repeating his Feb. 4 comments to the commission’s investigative arm, the Gaming Control Board, Trump said “it’s an honor to be here.” He said he had lost many deals in previous years because of a state licensing process that can take more than a year. Trump paid about $2 million for shares in Riviera Holdings Corp. That put him barely over a 10 percent threshold subjecting investors to investigation and licensure by casino regulators … The move was designed to start the state licensing process, Trump said, adding that he has little contact with Riviera executives and doesn’t intend to expand on his involvement with the property. Asked about his building plans, Trump said he favors a project such as his Trump towers in Manhattan, Chicago and elsewhere. There’s “not a great chance” that it would include New Frontier owner Phil Ruffin of Las Vegas, he added. > Trump’s television career and presidential bid probably disrupted any potential ventures in Nevada between 2004 and 2016, but on 25 February 2016, an article in the Wall Street Journal speculated that Trump was revisiting possibilities in Vegas: < Las Vegas casino owner Phil Ruffin said in an interview this week that he is hoping to build a casino with Mr. Trump next to the luxury high-rise Trump Hotel, which the two co-own on the Strip. He said the plans are still very preliminary, but he expects to accelerate them this year, and the Trump Organization would be a 50% owner. There are still no architectural renderings, land surveys or other concrete proposals, he added … [Son Eric] Trump said in an interview that various possible expansion plans have been discussed, including the casino and a new convention space. Nothing has been solidified, he said, adding that the family is focused on other matters including the elder Mr. Trump’s presidential campaign and developing hotels elsewhere. The proposed casino would be on a four-acre parcel next to the Trump Hotel, which Mr. Ruffin and Donald Trump opened in 2008 on land that Mr. Ruffin owned. The site is currently a parking lot for the hotel; Mr. Ruffin said the casino would be connected to the existing hotel … Mr. Ruffin said that he is now contemplating a $100 million casino, with the Trumps as 50% partners. … Mr. Ruffin said it is unclear if Mr. Trump or his family members would need to undergo the rigorous process of securing a license from the Nevada Gaming Control Board … Mr. Trump owned casinos in Atlantic City for decades but never had any gambling interests in Nevada. > We were unable to locate any information to substantiate the claim that Trump was ever denied a gaming license or that his Las Vegas hotel was originally planned as a casino. It was true Trump engaged in legal battles in the 1980s around buying casino stock. But in 2004, Trump was approved for the initial stages of casino-based development, and there was no indication he was ever declined a Nevada Gaming Commission license based on whether he was “trustworthy.” On 2 March 2016, the Nevada Gaming Commission replied to our inquiry, stating: < Donald Trump was licensed by the Nevada Gaming Commission in February 2004 >

national-debt-trump

national-debt-trump

The national debt saw a "surprising" decline of $102 billion between 20 January and 27 July 2017.

On 30 July 2017, the conservative Truth Division web site reported that the United States’ national debt had fallen to a “surprising” extent in the seven months since the inauguration of President Donald Trump: < President Donald Trump and his administration are undoing the government’s rampant spending that occurred under former President Obama’s watch. According the U.S. Treasury’s direct record, a surprising amount of money has been saved over the course of seven months. On January 20th, the day Trump was inaugurated, the total debt was $19,947,304,555,212.49. On July 30th, seven short months later, it’s at $19,844,938,940,351.37. Overall the debt has decreased by $102,365,614,861.12. > We have checked these numbers and set them in context, and found that the national debt did indeed fall by $102 billion between 20 January and the end of July 2017. This decline is also historically remarkable, in both absolute and percentage terms. This six-month fall in the national debt is also significant when measured against the size of the overall economy. National debt — the basics The national debt is, in brief, the total value of what the federal government owes, and is made up of accumulated annual deficits (when the government spends more than it receives in taxes and other income). It is made up of “public debt” and “intragovernmental holdings.” Public debt is, essentially, debt held by sources outside the central government. Intragovernmental holdings are debts between agencies within the federal government, in the form of government trust funds, such as Social Security trust funds. National debt — the numbers According to figures published by the Treasury Department’s Bureau of Fiscal Services on the TreasuryDirect web site, the national debt was $19.84 trillion on 27 July 2017 (not 30 July, as stated by Truth Division. On 20 January, it was $19.95 trillion. That shows a fall of $102.37 billion, or 0.51 percent, over a period of 131 business days. To set that in context, we analyzed national debt data stretching back to 12 July 1993, and examined every 131-day period in the last 24 years. You can download a spreadsheet containing all the relevant data here. Debt-to-GDP ratio The national debt, however, is best viewed with reference to the overall economy. If two countries have about the same national debt, the one with the smaller economy will likely be more constrained in its spending, whereas the larger economy — despite having the same level of debt — will be less affected in terms of economic and fiscal policy. A good way of checking this is to compare the size of the debt to the size of the economy, measured as GDP (gross domestic product). GDP is the combined market value of all goods and services produced in a given jurisdiction (in this case, the United States). This comparison between the size of the national debt and the size of the economy is known as the debt-to-GDP ratio. While the Treasury Department publishes the national debt for every business day, GDP is only published on a quarterly basis (once every three months). In order to compare the debt-to-GDP ratio on 27 July with the same figure on Inauguration Day, we have to get a little bit creative. For example, we know that the United States GDP was $18.9 trillion at the end of December 2016 (the end of the fourth quarter), according to figures published by the Bureau of Economic Analysis. We also know that the national debt on 30 December 2016 was $19.98 trillion, so the estimated debt-to-GDP ratio on that date was 105.67 percent. In other words, the debts of the United States federal government were 5.67 percent bigger than the size of the Unites States economy (when measured by GDP). At the end of the first quarter of 2017 (the end of March), GDP was $19.06 trillion. And we know that on 31 March, the national debt was $19.85 trillion, meaning the debt-to-GDP ratio was 104.14 percent — a healthier number than at the end of December. But to estimate GDP for all the days in between 30 December and 31 March (including 20 January, Inauguration Day) we have to cheat a little bit. You can read more about our methodology by downloading this spreadsheet, but here’s what our estimates revealed: Causes The Truth Division, a conservative, openly pro-Trump web site, clearly attributes this decline in the national debt to the president, claiming he and his administration are “undoing the government’s rampant spending” and “keeping his promises regarding fiscal responsibility”. However, the article does not cite any examples of actions taken by Donald Trump which would support this conclusion. Jared Bernstein, a senior fellow at the Center on Budget and Policy Priorities and former economic adviser to Vice President Joe Biden, dismissed any claims that President Trump is responsible: < Trump hasn’t legislated anything that would have any impact on the fiscal accounts, so it simply doesn’t make sense on the face it. > Instead, Bernstein told us, the cause of the drop in the debt is simple — the federal debt ceiling that has been in place since March 2017. < If you look at a plot of the total debt right now, it’s holding steady at the limit, because to go over the limit is unconstitutional. So you either have to engage in extraordinary measures or eventually default, and the latter is unimaginable so right now Treasury is engaged in the former. That is, they are delaying or suspending various payments that need to be made, particularly within some of their intra-governmental accounts… By those measures, they can hold the national debt where it is for a certain amount of time. > Eventually, Bernstein says, the debt ceiling will have to be lifted, and the payments that had been delayed will cause the national debt to increase once again. That pattern can be seen in this chart, which shows the national debt from January 2011 up to the end of July 2017. There are four flat lines showing four periods during which the debt ceiling was frozen: from May to August 2011; May to October 2013; March to October 2015; and the ongoing period since March 2017. Conclusion The Truth Division article accurately describes the extent to which the national debt fell between the inauguration of Donald Trump in January 2017 and the end of July of the same year. And it rightly describes this fall as “surprising”, since it ranks among the very largest 131-day declines in the national debt since July 1993, both in absolute and percentage terms. Similarly, the decline in both components of the national debt — public debt and intragovernmental holdings — was highly significant between 20 January and 27 July 2017, both in absolute and percentage terms, and as we have shown, the national debt has fallen by an estimated 2.25 percent since Inauguration Day — even when measured against the size of the overall Unites States economy. Whether or not any actions or decisions made by Donald Trump have caused or contributed to these historically remarkable declines in the debt is a question that goes beyond the scope of this particular fact check. You can download a spreadsheet containing all the data relevant to this article here.

Bureau of Fiscal Services.   “Frequently Asked Questions About the Public Debt”.  TreasuryDirect.gov.   1 April 2016.

russian-soldiers-last-words

russian-soldiers-last-words

Brooke Binkowski

A touching transcript reproduces a Russian soldier's last words before he ordered an airstrike on himself to kill ISIS members in Syria.

// <![CDATA[ (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&#038;version=v2.3"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); // ]]&gt; In March 2016, a story about the purported last words and actions of a doomed Russian Special Forces officer went viral. According to the Russian news web site Pravda.ru, that officer, Lt. Alexander Prokhorenko, was acting as a joint terminal attack controller in Syria when he was surrounded by ISIS forces: < Prokhorenko: They are outside, conduct the airstrike now please hurry, this is the end, tell my family I love them and i died fighting for my motherland. Command: Negative, return to the green line. Prokhorenko: Unable command, I am surrounded, they are outside, I don’t want them to take me and parade me, conduct the airstrike, they will make a mockery of me and this uniform. I want to die with dignity and take all these bastards with me. please my last wish, conduct the airstrike, they will kill me either way. Command: Please confirm your request. Prokhorenko : They [are] outside, this is the end commander, thank you, tell my family and my country I love them. Tell them I was brave and I fought until I could no longer. Please take care of my family, avenge my death, good bye commander, tell my family I love them! Command: [No response, orders the airstrike] > According to reports published by Russian news media, Prokherenko was indeed killed in Palmyra in late March 2016: <  The soldier died heroically, [bringing fire down on himself], after having been found by terrorists and surrounded. The parents and wife of Alexander Prokhorenko were notified, and the entire village [of Gorodki] mourned with loved ones, friends, classmates and co-workers of the Russian officer. I admire the heroism of the simple rural boy who was able to put the implementation of the objectives and the preservation of our lives above his,” said one of the friends of Alexander Prokhorenko. > The Russian government had unequivocally and repeatedly denied that there were any combat forces, special or otherwise, participating in ground fighting in Palmyra, Syria, but that narrative was contradicted on 17 March 2016 when Amaq News Agency (an ISIS propaganda arm) published photographs that appeared to show dead Russian soldiers in Syria. Shortly thereafter, the Russian government publicly admitted that they had soldiers on the ground in and around Palmyra, and stories of the “Russian Rambo,” Prokherenko, began to appear in Russian news media: < “A Russian special operations forces [SOF] officer was killed near a town of Palmyra while guiding Russian warplanes to IS [previously ISIS/ISIL] targets,” a military source at Russia’s airbase Khmeimim told Interfax news agency. The source added that the special forces operator was on a mission near Palmyra for at least a week, detecting the terrorists’ most important targets and providing coordinates for Russian warplanes to strike. “The officer died as a hero, calling a strike onto himself after he was compromised and surrounded by terrorists,” the source added. > The purported transcript of Prokherenko’s final words to his family and his country appeared not long afterward, but we’ve unable to track down either the original source of the transcript or a copy of the recording from which it was supposedly taken.  Italian debunker David Puente has traced the story’s online origin to a 26 March 2016 posting from a Facebook user who appears to be not in Russia, but in Bangladesh. The “soldier who dies bravely fighting against impossible odds” story is a common one in wartime, and it’s true that wartime does bring out reserves of courage (and horrendous acts of cruelty) in people who are either unintentionally caught up or active participants in it. However, it’s also true that conflict involves the spread of propaganda, whether it’s about how brave your side is, or how cowardly and base the other side has become.  Russia is a master at soft propaganda: the country has opened several news organizations (such as Russia Today and Sputnik News) that are owned and operated by its government and exist specifically to combat what they term biased international media — a common practice among countries who wish to improve their images outside their borders. (We note here that doomed “last words” transcripts have proved especially popular among readers, and that Pravda.ru has published its share of outlandish stories over the years, such as “Aliens Forced Americans Out from the Moon,” “Time Machine Built in Europe, Russian Scientists Say,” and “Alien and Human Skulls Found on Mars.”) The image of the hero soldier is a popular and effective one, particularly if the hero is an underdog 25-year-old with a beautiful pregnant wife at home (whose lavish and very polished wedding video just appeared online — uploaded by a Russian reporter — around the same time as this transcript), and who died in a courageous last stand against an enemy that is almost universally reviled. Of course, just because something makes a good story doesn’t mean it’s untrue. It’s difficult to figure out which the case of 25-year-old Lieutenant Alexander Prokherenko might be: That he existed and was killed in Syria seems to be vetted information, but the information that surfaced afterward could either be genuine or an example of the news media serving as a battleground in yet another proxy war (this one of information), with each salvo playing out and reverberating in the English-language press, aided and abetted by news outlets that uncritically print stories guaranteed to bring in pageviews regardless of whether or not they are genuine.

obama-trump-holocaust-memorial

obama-trump-holocaust-memorial

An image accurately depicts what President Trump and President Obama wrote in the Yad Yashem guest book.

A graphic purportedly showing the messages penned by President Trump and President Obama during their respective visits to Yad Vashem, Israel’s memorial to the victims of the Holocaust, appeared on social media in May 2017: < It is a great honor to be here with all of my friends – so amazing + will never forget. Donald Trump I am grateful to Yad Vashem and all of those responsible for this remarkable institution. At a time of great peril and promise, war and strife, we are blessed to have such a powerful reminder of man’s potential for great evil, but also our own capacity to rise up from tragedy and remake our world. Let our children come here, and know their history, so that they can add their voices to proclaim ‘never again.’ And may we remember those who perished, not only as victims, but also as individuals who hoped and loved and dreamed like us, and who have become symbols of the human spirit. Barack Obama > This image accurately shows what Trump and Obama wrote in the Yad Vashem guest book. President Trump visited Yad Vashem on 23 May 2017. He delivered a speech at the memorial and signed the guest book. Haaretz, a news outlet in the middle east, posted an image of Trump’s message: The text of Obama’s message is also accurate. Obama visited Yad Vashem in July 2008, when he was a presidential candidate. Haaretz also published an image of this message: Much ado was made about the differences between the messages written by President Trump and Obama after visiting Yad Vashem. The Washington Post noted that Trump’s tight schedule may have contributed to the brevity and oddly cheerful tone of his message: < The brevity and tone of the note may have been a function of the hurry the president was in during his time at the site, known as Yad Vashem, which he visited Tuesday. Packing so much into just 27 hours in Israel left only half an hour for the memorial, a customary stop on U.S. presidential visits, which precluded him from getting a full tour of the museum. Trump already had come under fire for that perceived slight to the memorial before his one-sentence missive started raising eyebrows and making headlines. > In 2008, George W. Bush left an even shorter note than Trump’s (although without the current president’s signature exclamation marks): God bless Israel. Here are a few other messages penned by United States politicians in the Yad Vashem guest book: < Bill Clinton: “Today we have come one step closer to the time when the people of Israel will live in peace with all of their neighbors, when the awful events of death and destruction memorialized here will be banished to the past.”   Hillary Clinton: “Yad Vashem is a testament to the power of truth in the face of denial, the resilience of the human spirit in the face of despair, the triumph of the Jewish people over murder and destruction and a reminder to all people that the lessons of the Holocaust must never be forgotten. God bless Israel and its future.” Laura Bush: Each life is precious. Each memory calls us to action. To honor those lost we commit ourselves to reject hatred and to teach tolerance and live in peace. Bill de Blasio: We must always remember and ensure that “never again” is an idea we live by. Chuck Hagel: For my friends of Israel – Thank you for this magnificent institution reminding all mankind of the depths and evil – but also the promise and hope of courage and men. A beautiful and important tribute to the victims of the past and a reminder for the generations of the future.  >

Guild, Blair.  “What Presidents Trump, Obama, Clinton and Bush Wrote at Yad Vashem Holocaust Memorial.”   CBS News  23 May 2017.;Rhodan, Maya.  “Read What Trump and Other Presidents Wrote in the Guest Book at Yad Vashem.”   Time  23 May 2017.;Bearak, Max.  “The Huge Contrast Between Obama’s and Trump’s Visits to Israel’s Holocaust Memorial.”   Washington Post  23 May 2017.;Sonam, Sheth.  “All the Notes Trump, Obama, Clinton and More US Leaders Left at the Holocaust Memorial.”   AOL  24 May 2017.

las-vegas-shooting-rumors-hoaxes-and-conspiracy-theories

las-vegas-shooting-rumors-hoaxes-and-conspiracy-theories

We investigated a number of hoaxes, rumors, and conspiracy theories associated with a mass shooting on the Las Vegas strip on 1 October 2017.

On 1 October 2017, a shooter opened fire on an outdoor country music festival in Las Vegas, killing 58 people and wounding hundreds. As is often the case with major or tragic events, rumors immediately began to flow, even before the shooting ended and the investigation began. The shooting began just after 10 P.M. local time (or after midnight on 2 October 2017 on the East Coast). Many of the claims circulated during prior mass shootings and reflected “tropes” commonly invoked by such events, and others were unique to the incident and circumstances: Although outbreaks of violence are frequently attributed to the Islamic State before an initial investigation takes place, a propaganda arm for the group attempted to claim responsibility for the attack. However, investigators quickly ruled out their involvement in the shooting. No. A Facebook page claiming to be run by antifa operatives in Melbourne, Australia posted and then deleted a status update essentially blaming the massacre on American antifa protesters. However, credible news sources and the group itself pegged the Facebook source as phony before the Las Vegas shooting. Also no. Photographs of a Trump protester circulating on social media do not show the Vegas gunman: Oftentimes, initial compelling rumors continue spreading long after a mundane explanation has emerged. Many social media users heard about an eerie warning spread by a visibly agitated woman nearly an hour prior to the massacre, but far fewer saw that the witness to that purported prediction later walked her claims back significantly. No. The concept of a “second shooter” became embedded in American consciousness after the first conspiracy rumors circulated about the assassination of President John F. Kennedy. A meme that appeared after this particular mass shooting highlights purported “inconsistencies” in the “narrative” of the incident, but it does not vary much from the other conspiracy theories that come up after every such incident: Similar rumors take root in the wake of nearly all mass shootings, but neither investigators nor any evidence has indicated that anyone other than Stephen Paddock fired into the crowd at the concert. < The rumor of a second shooter during the mass shooting in Las Vegas … received so much attention, Las Vegas police addressed it at a [3 October 2017] news conference. “I want to emphasize Paddock is solely responsible for this heinous act. We are aware of the rumors outside of the media and also on social media that there was more than one assailant,” said Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Undersheriff Kevin McMahill said. He said, there was no evidence to support the theory of another shooter. > Yes. CBS attorney Hayley Geftman-Gold was relieved of her duties after a controversy after post-shooting remarks attributed to her were captured and publicized by a blog. A status update was widely shared as a “silver lining” after the massacre: < Thomas Gunderson October 2 at 4:48am · I want to say this right now while it’s fresh. People PLEASE listen to me! There are bad people in this world, but tonight, I saw every race and gender come together to save lives and protect each other. I had women tie my leg up to stop the bleeding, I had men carrying me on their back to safety and I had many black officers and civilians holding my hand and staying with me every second of the way. Our president is far from perfect, but the divide this country is being created by media and the select few cases that they spread world wide. But you don’t get to see the good in people. I’m lying in my hospital bed right now in tears, not because I’m injured but because I did my best to save lives and not once did I see color or gender. Nor did anyone else. My friends, please please take a step back, turn off the tv and go love the person next to you. Black, white, Mexican, straight, gay or anything else. Love on them and show that we are united as one in this country and NO ONE, no matter how hard they try, can’t break us! Ever! > Its veracity remains unclear at this time. On 3 October 2017, a Facebook post appeared featuring purportedly leaked crime scene photographs of the Mandalay Bay room from which the shots were fired: The authenticity of the photographs is unknown, and it is not clear whether they were leaked (versus being taken by a bystander or obtained in a fashion other than surreptitious distribution). Another claim common in circulation after the Las Vegas massacre was that mass shooters are affected by psychotropic drugs such as benzodiazepines, antidepressants, or anti-psychotic medications: On 3 October 2017, Facebook user Rikki Raulerson shared the following Facebook status update, the contents of which are unverified: < So here goes…. Especially to those of you saying to stop talking about this, stop making assumptions etc. Call me crazy, call me dramatic, call me whatever you want. I’m posting this for those of us who were on the strip Sunday night, who know what we saw and what we were told by police officers, security guards, and even the local news when all of this madness started. And I am posting this in hopes of informing others who have believed everything they’ve seen on the news. If while leaving the Cosmopolitan, we had been told there was one shooting at the Mandalay Bay, Anthony and I would have not been worried for our lives and we would have continued to go out, knowing we weren’t headed to that particular area of the strip. But that’s not what we were told. We were told that there were 7 confirmed shooters, and confirmed deaths at multiple hotels. Including Bellagio, the Aria and New York New York. Being told this by a security guard, who then told us to go to the third floor for safety. However, Anthony says, “No Rikki. This is a very popular hotel, I don’t feel like the third floor of this popular hotel in public is the safest place. We’re going to try and get out of here right now.” Running back to our hotel next door, Vdara, we are told once again by police/security checking our id and room key, “yes multiple hotels effected. Go to your room and do not leave.” We then get to the room, immediately turn on the news and start watching out of our windows to figure out what is going on. The news also states, live, that the Bellagio had been effected and there was one confirmed death. Now… skip ahead about an hour. The news is no longer stating anything about the other hotels effected. They say it is one person. Every bit of info that was being initially given to us was disappearing. We could physically see from our window view, fire alarms going off at the cosmopolitan, and multiple cop cars and ambulances pulling up there as well. We wanted more information about what was happening at these other hotels right next to us, and we weren’t getting it. And we still aren’t. Monday morning I am of course telling my friends and family about our experience, and I was starting to really feel like I was crazy. Everyone was telling me there was only one shooter, and I just couldn’t understand what I had seen. Finally, other people like myself started speaking out. I was relieved to know that I wasn’t crazy, but now just as confused as to why the media is trying to hide this information. There are now videos and statements popping up all over the web, showing proof of other shooters and other effected hotels. Why are they trying to hide this?! If for no other reason, think about being a family member of the others who died or were injured at these other hotels. They deserve the respect, and the truth as to what happened to their loved ones. Now, can we please stop talking about Gun Control for just a few minutes, and figure out what is really going on here? Figure out the real motive of this incident, and inform people of the truth. Laws can be put in place for anything and everything. There will always be people who break them. And especially with all of the technology we have now days, it is not very hard to find anything you want. Whether it’s an illegal weapon, drugs, anything. Laws will always be broken. So let’s stop pretending this incident wouldn’t have happened if more laws were in place, but instead demand the truth about what really happened that night, and why? Don’t be so naive. > Although this rumor is a variation on the “second shooter” claim, it also fails to take into account the difficulties faced by eyewitnesses in identifying the specifics of the shooting as it happened. Due to the close proximity most Vegas casinos share (many are connected to neighboring venues) and the acoustics of the Strip, a barrage of gunfire from one location could easily be mistaken for one from somewhere nearby. Unproven. The post in question was nebulous, and still managed to inaccurately describe the subsequent attack. Although the general location (the Las Vegas strip) fit the prognostication, no other elements were compelling enough to consider the claim credible. No. Although the meme’s origin was unknown, it was one of many satirizing Bachmann’s positions. No. A disreputable source claimed that Mandalay Bay security guard Jesus Campos was an “accomplice” to Las Vegas Strip mass shooter Stephen Paddock, but the Bureau of Alcohol, Tobacco and Firearms (ATF) put paid to the phony story with alacrity. For the most part, no. Conspiracies swirled arround a Las Vegas Craigslist ad archived on 17 August 2017; date stamps suggest it was published on or around 3 August 2017: On 6 October 2017, Puppet String News claimed: < Once again we have a tragic event in America, and just like massive protests across America the Las Vegas shooting had ads for actors on Crowds On Demand back in August before the shooting. Two things seem to pop up after major events take place in America in the last year or so, and that is we get a fucked up investigation and there always seems to be ads for actors before an event like the Las Vegas shooting. So now we have new evidence with crisis actors being looked for on Craigslist and Crowds On Demand a month before the Las Vegas event…I think it’s time we launch an investigation into Crowds On Demand don’t you? > WorldTruth.tv asserted the same day (in a post riddled with typographical errors) that the suspicious advertisement had conveniently been deleted after the Las Vegas shooting: < A California based company called ‘Crowds on Demand’ placed an advert back in August for ‘crisi actors in the Las Vegas area. The adverts, which has since been removed, advertised for protests, Rallies, Audiences, PR Stunts, and Celebrity Events. Crowds on Demand had also placed the same advert on Backstage.com, and as of today, it is still online:Note the wording – “attending a show/concert” … So is it just a coincidence that 6 weeks before the La Vegas shooting farce, we have a notorious company known for hiring crisis actors placing adverts to recruit people as crisis actors for an unspecified event in Las Vegas? > However, all Craigslist posts expire automatically after 30 to 45 days. Even going by the latest date the post was archived (19 August 2017) and not the likely date it was posted (3 August 2017), 49 days passed between the date of the post and 6 October 2017 and two months between the posting date and the 1 October 2017 shooting. Moreover, anti-semitic conspiracy theorists previously set their sights on the same posting — as part of predictions that bad actors planned chaos for the then-recent Mayweather/McGregor bout. Another post in a general conspiracy forum warned: < It’s obvious to most that a race war is being pushed. The McGregor/Mayweather fight could be used as a catalyst for such. Mayweather has already planted seeds by calling McGregor racist (even though Floyd referred to Pacquiao as a little yellow monkey). Today an ad was found on Craigslist looking for crisis actors in Vegas. It’s been up for two weeks. A friend called, and the dates these “actors” are needed is Aug 25th – Aug 27th. Awfully coincidental, eh? Be careful ya’ll, remember to let your love and light shine above all else. > Even after Vegas shooting conspiracies had begun circulating, forum posters recalled the post as linked to the boxing match. Although there was some confusion, posters for the most part correctly identified the Craigslist post as dated to early August 2017. The advertisement was legitimate, but it was retrofitted to align with false flag theories about the Vegas shooting and its original connotations (fizzled predictions about a “race war” at a boxing match) were elided in the retelling. Claims that it “disappeared” were down to the fact the page was more than 45 days old at the time it recaptured social media attention.Â

Bleakley, Caroline.  “Las Vegas Police Debunk Second Shooter Rumor.”   KLAS-TV.  4 October 2017.;Burbeck, Lynn.  “How Long Does An Ad Stay On Craigslist?”   Chron.com.  Accessed 11 October 2017.;Harasim, Paul.  “Las Vegas Strip Shooter Prescribed Anti-Anxiety Drug In June.”   Las Vegas Review-Journal.  3 October 2017.

hepatitis-a-outbreak-in-san-diego

hepatitis-a-outbreak-in-san-diego

A major Hepatitis A outbreak in San Diego has been pinned on undocumented immigrants there.

On 3 September 2017, the web site America’s Freedom Fighters published a story that purported to directly link undocumented immigrants in San Diego, California to a local Hepatitis A outbreak: < The ultra liberal city of San Diego, California which incidentally is inundated with illegal aliens is facing a health crisis and authorities have declared PUBLIC HEALTH EMERGENCY. A public health emergency was declared Friday over an outbreak of ‘hepatitis A’ that has been linked to at least 15 deaths and 400 hospitalizations. > It also closed on a more explicitly anti-immigrant note: < These kind of problems are typical in liberal cities. Build the wall. God Bless. > San Diego County officials did declare a local health emergency on 31 August 2017 in response to a hepatitis outbreak, but there is no indication whatsoever that it originated or was spread by the city’s local undocumented population. A spokesperson for the county’s Health and Human Services department, Craig Sturak, told us: < The primary population being impacted is the homeless and/or drug-using individuals on the street. I am not aware of any connection to undocumented immigrants. > Sturak confirmed to us that 15 people had died in connection to the outbreak as of 29 August 2017. However, he also said that 263 people — not 400 — had been hospitalized out of 378 cases. San Diego City Council member Chris Ward, whose district includes the downtown area (which has a high concentration of the local homeless population), told us in a statement: < Like local health officials, I have seen no evidence of any connection and would strongly caution against spreading unsubstantiated rumors that serve to undermine our ability to respond to this health crisis effectively. > Fellow council member David Alvarez, who has sparred with Mayor Kevin Faulconer regarding the city response to the issue, told us: < There’s no validity to this. It’s just individuals who are looking to scapegoat using vulnerable populations, whether it’s our homeless community or our immigrant communities. It’s not surprising in the age of [President Donald] Trump, to be honest. But still shameful. > The disease is a liver infection that, according to the Centers for Disease Control, is “usually transmitted by the fecal-oral route, either through person-to-person contact or consumption of contaminated food or water.” Following the emergency declaration by public health officer Wilma Wooten, the city began installing hand-washing stations in  at least thirty locations around the city, including more than a dozen downtown. Street-cleaning crews will also be directed to remove “all feces, blood, bodily fluids or contaminated surfaces” with a mix of high-pressure water and bleach. The outbreak was traced back to November 2016, but according to Wooten, vaccination efforts and distribution of hygiene kits did not quell the spread of the infection. Experts reportedly did not gauge the speed of the outbreak until March 2017. Alvarez has called for Faulconer to declare a homeless state of emergency, saying that it would allow the city to bypass some regulations in order to designate some buildings as temporary housing. An advisor for Faulconer, Jonathan Herrera, countered by saying that Faulconer had already done so in 2016 and 2017. On 30 August 2017, the California state assembly’s Joint Committee On Legislative Audit approved a request by state Sen. Ben Hueso (D) to investigate whether the county has employed enough public nurses to deal with the outbreak. We have reached out to the San Diego Regional Task Force on the Homeless seeking comment. The group reported in April 2017 that there were 9,116 people locally as “living in the streets or in shelters,” up 5 percent compared to 2016. Alvarez told us that the task force did not ask for individuals’ immigration status while compiling its data.

Halverstadt, Lisa. “County, City Say They’re Taking Steps to Move Quickly on Hepatitis A Outbreak.” Voice of San Diego. 1 September 2017.;Centers for Disease Control and Prevention. “Viral Hepatitis.”;Sisson, Paul. “County Declares Health Emergency for Hepatitis Outbreak.” San Diego Union-Tribune. 1 September 2017.;Warth, Gary. “Alvarez Asks Mayor to Declare Homeless State of Emergency; Mayor’s Office Says He Already Has.” San Diego Union-Tribune. 31 August 2017.

football-fan-flag-stand-national-anthem

football-fan-flag-stand-national-anthem

A pro football fan sat on the United States flag while wearing a shirt that read: "I stand for the national anthem."

While President Donald Trump has argued that player protests against extrajudicial police killings show disrespect for the U.S. flag, a photograph published by the sports news web site Deadspin on 16 October 2017 shows at least one pro football fan visibly tarnishing the flag. The image shows an unidentified man wearing a t-shirt bearing the phrase, “I STAND FOR THE NATIONAL ANTHEM” under the logo for the New York Jets. The statement is a rebuke to the kneeling demonstrations that originated with former San Francisco quarterback Colin Kaepernick prior to the 2016 season, who began to kneel during the national anthem in order to bring attention to and protest police brutality. According to Deadspin news editor Samer Kalaf, a reader took the photograph during the 15 October 2017 game between the Jets and the New England Patriots and sent it to them, saying: < Basically, me and my friend were walking around the stadium sometime during the 3rd quarter. There is a huge tv screen by the food carts right inside the stadium where people gather to watch. We went over there to check it out and we saw him spread the flag out and sit down. I thought it was too ironic so I snagged a picture. He sat on it for a few minutes before leaving. > Kalaf told us that he took steps to verify the date of the image: < I put the picture in reverse Google image search and I didn’t find anything. I went and looked at the metadata of the photo and it was taken on October 15th, which would have been Sunday and taken at 3:18 p.m. That would’ve been during the game. > Kalaf also sent us the original version of the photograph, which he said his web site cropped in part to avoid showing a minor standing near the man sitting on the flag. With Deadspin’s permission, we are publishing the full photograph with the minor’s face blurred out: The t-shirt seen in the image is not available for sale at the Jets’ team store. Also, laying an American flag on the ground — let alone sitting on it — is a violation of the U.S. Flag Code, which states: < The flag should never touch anything beneath it, such as the ground, the floor, water, or merchandise. > While Kaepernick has not been signed by a team during the 2017 regular season, other teams have carried out their own demonstrations during the anthem. Instead of kneeling, however, the Jets — whose owner, Woody Johnson, was appointed by the president to be the U.S. ambassador to the United Kingdom — have opted to stand with their arms linked. They did so again before the game against the Patriots.

Legal Information Institute.  “4 U.S. Code Chapter 1 – The Flag.”;Breech, John.  “Donald Trump Rips NFL, Says Owners Should Cut Any Players Who Kneel During Anthem.”   CBS News.  23 September 2017.;Rapaport, Daniel.  “Jets Acting Owner, Brother of Trump Appointee, Links Arms with Players During Anthem.”   Sports Illustrated.  24 September 2017.;Haring, Bruce.  “NFL Players Continue Anthem Protests in Week Six Despite Commissioner Plea.”   Deadline.  15 October 2017.

jennifer-lawrence-hurricanes-trump

jennifer-lawrence-hurricanes-trump

Bethania Palma

Actress Jennifer Lawrence blamed recent hurricanes in the U.S. on President Trump.

In September 2017, right-wing websites accused actress Jennifer Lawrence of blaming President Trump for the deadly hurricanes that recently ravaged several Caribbean nations along with Texas and Florida. Newsbusters, for example, reported that Lawrence said “‘Mother Nature’s Rage’ Directed at U.S. Because of Trump.” Two days later, Fox News host Tucker Carlson dedicated a segment to Lawrence’s purported comments with an accompanying online article headline that reads, “Tucker Slams ‘Out of Touch’ Jennifer Lawrence for Linking Hurricanes to Trump.” In the segment, Carlson and his guest poke fun at Lawrence for suffering from what they call “Trump Derangement Syndrome.” The false rumor is a twisted version of comments that Lawrence made during an interview on British television to promote her new movie Mother!, a psychological thriller that uses climate change as a central metaphor. During the interview, Lawrence said science has demonstrated that climate change is the result of human activity. When prompted by the interviewer, she added that she was troubled by the 2016 presidential election results. She never mentioned President Trump by name in that interview, but within hours various publications were sensationalizing it with commentary claiming the actress blamed him for hurricanes Harvey and Irma, which struck southeast Texas and Florida in late August and early September. It didn’t take long for the rumor to spread to more traditionally mainstream publications like the New York Daily News and celebrity site Us Weekly, which put the false claim in their headlines. The British publication The Independent further took liberties with the actress’s comments by reporting, inaccurately: < Jennifer Lawrence has suggested that it is difficult not to feel as though the devastating hurricanes in Texas and approaching Florida are signs of “Mother Nature’s rage and wrath” at America for electing Donald Trump. > The Independent story has an even more misleading headline if one sees it in a Google search result: Here is a transcript of the actual exchange: < Long: When the director was asked about the film, why it was so dark, he said, “It’s a mad time to be alive.” And there’s certainly a sort of end-of-days feeling about it. For many people in America who would say perhaps it’s true there at the moment than anywhere else. I mean what are your thoughts about the changes that have happened in your own country over the last year or so? Lawrence: It’s scary, you know, it’s this new language that’s forming. I don’t even recognize it. It’s also scary to know — it’s been proven through science that human activity — that climate change is due to human activity and we continue to ignore it and the only voice that we really have is through voting. Um, so — Long: And you have voted — Lawrence: And we voted, and it was really startling. You know, you’re watching these hurricanes now, and it’s really — it’s hard, especially while promoting this movie not to feel Mother Nature’s rage, or wrath. > On 10 September 2017, Lawrence herself responded to the controversy on her official Facebook page, writing: < My remarks were taken grossly out of context. Obviously I never claimed that President Trump was responsible for these tragic hurricanes. That is a silly and preposterous headline that is unfortunate, because it detracts from the millions of lives that are being impacted by these devastating storms and the recent earthquake. What is really important is focusing on the ways we can help. My heart is with everyone affected and the brave first responders who are working to keep us all safe. Please join me in donating to: United Way of Houston https://www.unitedwayhouston.org Save The Children www.savethechildren.org Americares https://www.americares.org > During the interview, Lawrence did express sadness in the failure to adequately address climate change and environmental degradation and said that the power to do so comes from Americans’ ability to vote for their elected leaders. President Trump has been on the record denying climate change and has selected fellow climate change deniers to head key agencies such as the EPA and NASA. However, although Lawrence has made it no secret she is not a supporter of the president, she didn’t blame him for the recent hurricanes.

Fox News. “Tucker Slams ‘Out of Touch’ Jennifer Lawrence for Linking Hurricanes to Trump.”   8 September 2017.;Marsh, Kristine. “Jennifer Lawrence: ‘Mother Nature’s Rage’ Directed at U.S. Because of Trump.”   Newsbusters.org. 7 September 2017.;O’Conner, Roisin. “Irma, Hurricane Jose: Mother! star Jennifer Lawrence suggests storms are nature’s ‘wrath’ against Donald Trump.”   The Independent. 9 September 2017.;Davenport, Christian. “Support Builds for Bridenstine to Lead NASA Despite Past Skepticism on Climate Change.”   The Washington Post. 11 September 2017.;Lawrence, Jennifer. “Don’t Be Afraid, Be Loud: Jennifer Lawrence on What We Do Now.”   Broadly. 10 November 2016.

catholic-school-statues

catholic-school-statues

In 2017, the San Domenico school in San Anselmo, California removed some Catholic statues from its campus in an effort to be more inclusive.

On 25 August 2017, WND reported that the San Domenico independent Catholic school in San Anselmo, California had removed dozens of statues of Catholic and Christian figures, including Christ, from the school’s campus: < Parents of students at a Catholic school in the San Francisco Bay area are protesting the board’s decision to remove and relocate more than 160 statues of Jesus, Mary and historic church figures from the campus in an effort to make the school more “inclusive.” > The story extensively cites an earlier article published by a local newspaper, the Marin Independent Journal, which quotes some parents and community members as being concerned about the removal of the statues, as well as school officials and board members defending it. On 26 August 2017, conservative site BizPac Review followed up with its own report, writing: < Holy mother of Jesus, what is going on in America? An independent Catholic school in the San Francisco Bay Area — where else? — has removed a statue of Mary and Baby Jesus from its campus in an attempt to be more “inclusive.” A number of statues and Catholic icons have been removed from the campus of San Domenico School in San Anselmo, the Marin Independent Journal reported. A move that is part of a “new strategic plan” to appeal to more potential students. > It’s true that San Domenico has been removing Catholic statues from its campus, and that this has been part of an ongoing effort to be more inclusive and appeal to non-Catholic prospective students. However, while reports do mention the fact that San Domenico is an independent Catholic school, they don’t clearly explain what this means for the school’s ethos and strategic planning, and why the decision to remove the statues is a good deal less surprising when San Domenico’s status as an independent Catholic school (as opposed to a Diocesan Catholic school) is taken into consideration. A spokesperson for San Domenico told us that the school had removed six out of sixteen statues from campus, leaving ten. WND’s claim that the school had removed “more than 160 statues” is therefore false by a wide margin. School authorities also recently moved a statue of Saint Dominic — the school’s patron saint — to a more prominent place on campus and added a plaque to honor him. The San Domenico school was founded in 1850 as an independent Catholic school by the Dominican Sisters of San Rafael. In 1965, it became an independent nonprofit organization. It is not a Diocesan school, which means it has never been under the control of the Catholic church hierarchy. Diocesan Catholic schools are owned and run by local Catholic archdioceses (regional divisions of the church throughout the United States and the rest of the world). They therefore form part of the church hierarchy which ultimately extends upwards to the Vatican. San Domenico school (like other independent Catholic schools) exists outside this realm, and therefore has independence in balancing its Dominican Catholic heritage and ethos with its emphasis on cultural and religious inclusivity and diversity. One manifestation of this difference is that students at diocesan schools are generally taught Catholic dogma, while students at schools like San Domenico are not; instead, they receive instruction in “religious studies”. In the lower school, this curriculum is known as “religious studies and character development”. Students are taught to develop a “moral framework for making ethical decisions which guide personal choices and interpersonal relationships.” In the middle school, this means pupils study the Bible, Quran, Buddhism and do comparative research on major world religions. In the upper school, students are offered classes in global studies, philosophy, the history of Christianity, and Zen Buddhism, among others. The school is run by a Board of Trustees. In 2016, just three of the board’s 26 members were from the Dominican Sisters of San Rafael. A spokesperson for the school told us that approximately 80 percent of the school’s parents and students do not identify as Catholic. In June 2016, the Board of Trustees approved a new strategic plan for the school. The second of its five main goals was: “Strengthen San Domenico’s identity as an Independent School and clearly articulate our inclusive spiritual foundation.” There is historical context for this effort, according to the strategic plan (page 8): < The Dominican Sisters of San Rafael, who have been trailblazers in facilitating education, providing healthcare, seeking social justice, and addressing serious environmental issues, founded San Domenico as an Independent School committed to inclusivity, inquiry and character-driven education. …In addition to being an Independent School, San Domenico is a Dominican School, which means that we express our religious identity through the charism of the Dominican Sisters of San Rafael. Their motto of Veritas, the search for truth, their focus on social justice and environmental stewardship, and their educational philosophy grounded in both inclusivity and a spirit of inquiry, provides the foundation for our unique approach to spiritual education and the study of world religions. > Finally, it should be noted that the decision to remove some Catholic statues from public visibility on San Domenico’s campus does not appear to have come from any external pressure or the implacable forces of “political correctness”. It’s a step that school authorities themselves have chosen as part of San Domenico’s evolution, and it is fully in keeping with the school’s stated philosophy of inclusivity and diversity.

Halstead, Richard.  “San Anselmo’s San Domenico School Creates Stir by Removing Catholic Statues.”  Marin Independent Journal.  24 August 2017.

usher-std-rumor

usher-std-rumor

In 2012, Usher paid $1.1 million to settle a lawsuit brought by a woman claiming he had knowingly infected her with herpes.

On 19 July 2017, entertainment and gossip web site Radar Online reported that musician and singer Usher had paid $1.1 million to a woman who had sued him, accusing him of knowingly infecting her with herpes: < An exclusive RadarOnline.com probe has blown the lid off the explosive revelation that a high-profile A-lister has settled a million-dollar lawsuit after infecting a sex partner with the incurable herpes virus! As part of the shocking exposé, Radar obtained a lawsuit between a celebrity stylist and 38-year-old singer Usher. Legal documents detailed how the eight-time Grammy winner — whose real name is Usher Raymond IV — had rigorous unprotected sex without disclosing he was stricken with the rabid virus. > The article was cited in subsequent reports by Fox News, the New York Daily News and People magazine, among others. The original stories link to what are presented as excerpts from court documents concerning a case that the web site claims was filed in the Los Angeles Superior Court. The article does not specify what kinds of documents the excerpts are from, although they are presented in the manner of a civil complaint. We were also unable to find any civil lawsuit of this kind involving Usher, whose full legal name is Usher Raymond IV, despite a search of the Los Angeles Superior Court’s online database and despite consulting with court staff. We were, however, able to find other (unrelated) cases involving the singer. Furthermore, the purported excerpts do not include a case number, jurisdiction, the names of attorneys, or the name of the presiding judge.  We contacted Radar Online and asked them to provide the case number of the lawsuit against Usher, which their article claims was settled with a $1.1 million payment in December 2012. We did not receive any response. Two days after Radar Online’s article appeared, the entertainment and gossip web site TMZ published its own story, claiming that Usher was being sued by a second woman alleging negligence, battery and emotional distress. According to a second report, this woman also claims to have contracted herpes after having sex with Usher and is demanding payment of $20 million. TMZ claimed to have seen legal documents related to the case, but their articles do not mention the jurisdiction or court before which the lawsuit has purportedly been filed. We asked the web site for the case number, jurisdiction and court in question, but — as with Radar Online — we did not receive a response. According to TMZ’s first article, the woman’s lawsuit claims that she and Usher had sex in Atlanta, Georgia and New Orleans, Louisiana. We could not find any relevant lawsuit in the database of the Fulton County, Georgia Superior Court, and no one from the Orleans Parish Civil District Court was able to find any such lawsuit relating to New Orleans. We also sent a list of questions to Usher’s record label, his agents at William Morris Endeavor Entertainment, and an attorney who has represented the singer in other legal matters over the years, including earlier in 2017. We did not receive a response from any of them. We could not find a civil case of the type described by Radar Online involving Usher and before the California Superior Court in Los Angeles. The purported excerpts from court documents they have published lack important details and are so scant that we cannot verify their authenticity. Nor could we find a civil case of the kind described by TMZ in the databases of the two most likely courts to be hearing such a case. And despite our best efforts, we have not heard Usher’s side of the story; we are, therefore, unable to say whether or not the claims published by Radar Online and TMZ are true.

trump-puerto-rico-golf-course

trump-puerto-rico-golf-course

Donald Trump "bankrupted" a golf course in Puerto Rico, leaving taxpayers there on the hook for $33 million worth of debt.

In the aftermath of a series of hurricanes in September 2017 — particularly Maria, which devastated the United States territory of Puerto Rico — President Donald Trump reflected on the infrastructural damage caused by those storms in a 25 September 2017 tweet: < Texas & Florida are doing great but Puerto Rico, which was already suffering from broken infrastructure & massive debt, is in deep trouble.. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 26, 2017 > In response, public relations and marketing executive Lainie Green issued a series of tweets that went viral, accusing President Trump of having added to Puerto Rico’s debt by bankrupting a golf course there and defaulting on $33 million worth of government-issued bonds: < Massive debt you and your sons helped when you bankrupted your golf course & never paid back the $33 mil bond you left Puerto Ricans with — Lainie Green (@AureliaGroup) September 26, 2017 > < You remember because you filed for the bankruptcy a month after you started running for president in 2015 — Lainie Green (@AureliaGroup) September 26, 2017 > < And you claimed because you didn’t own it wasn’t your fault that you were just managing for 5 years leading up to the bankruptcy — Lainie Green (@AureliaGroup) September 26, 2017 > < So how much are you going to give back of that $600,000 paycheck you got for sticking Puerto Rico with a $33 million debt? — Lainie Green (@AureliaGroup) September 26, 2017 > Green’s account of the episode got some facts right, but it also left out some important context necessary for any assessment of Trump’s responsibility for the bankruptcy of the golf course. According to documents first detailed in a 2016 BuzzFeed investigation, in 2008 Trump International entered into an arrangement with the owners of Coco Beach Golf & Country Club, a foundering resort and golf course that had opened in 2004 on the northeast coast of Puerto Rico about 30 miles from San Juan. Under the agreement, the future president’s company licensed the Trump name to the owners and took on a share of the resort’s day-to-day management in exchange for a fee. The owners of the resort, which was renamed Trump International Golf Club Puerto Rico after 2008, had already received significant financial assistance from the Puerto Rican government before Trump’s intervention. In 2000 and 2004, Puerto Rico’s Industrial, Tourist, Educational, Medical and Environmental Control Facilities Financing Authority (AFICA) issued the owners of the club a total of $25,497,854 in bonds to help build and launch the resort. In 2009, the Puerto Rican government also invested $50 million in the Hotel Gran Melia, which was part of the resort and provided a crucial stream of customers for the golf club, according to BuzzFeed. By October 2011, Coco Beach had defaulted on $26 million in bonds and had to seek another round of financing. In 2015, the company filed for bankruptcy under its original name, Coco Beach Golf and Country Club, citing debts of more than $78 million but only $9 million in assets. Bankruptcy court records show that Puerto Rico’s Tourism Development Fund made a claim of $32,606,821, essentially leaving Puerto Rican taxpayers on the hook for the better part of $33 million. Does all this mean that Trump “bankrupted” the golf course, though? Not exactly. The evidence shows that Coca Beach had consistently been operating at a loss and accumulating debts in the years before Trump International became involved with its management. And a significant portion of the financial assistance provided by the Puerto Rican government was given in 2000 and 2004, well before the future U.S. president’s company arrived on the scene. Puerto Rico had already been hard hit by a recession well before the Trump International contracted to assist with the club’s management, and in the two years before Trump International’s intervention (2006-07), Coco Beach operated at an average annual net loss of $5.3 million, according to BuzzFeed. Moreover, neither Donald Trump nor Trump International held an ownership stake in the property, took part in its development, or was involved with its financing; they only operated and managed the resort. Holding Trump to be solely or primarily responsible for the bankruptcy of a business they didn’t own, that was already heavily in debt, and was losing several million dollars a year before Trump arrived on the scene would be something of an unfair standard. However, one could argue that Trump International received a good deal of money from the Coco Beach deal yet failed to turn the club around, or even stanch its financial bleeding. According to the March 2011 bond offering (which was itself required to cover losses on the Puerto Rican government’s 2000 and 2004 bond investments), Trump International had given certain assurances about the future viability of the resort: < The continued operations of the Partnership are dependant [sic] upon the ability of the Club to attract customers and control operating expenses. Trump International Co. (Club Manager) has developed a plan to achieve and maintain positive operating cash flows sufficient to allow the Partnership to continue as a going concern. In particular, the Club Manager [Trump International] has developed programs to attract members and use the Club, while containing operating costs. > Whatever that plan was, it did not succeed. The 2012 financials show that the club’s average annual losses rose to $6.3 million during the period that Trump’s company provided management services to the resort (2008-2012), $1 million more per year than the business had been losing before. Further, for this lack of success, Trump International garnered a total of $609,607 in management fees between 2008 and 2012. (This figure is likely the source of Lainie Green’s reference to a “$600,000 paycheck” received by Donald Trump.) Donald Trump did not set Coco Beach Golf and Country Club on course for ruin, but he wasn’t able to save it from that fate. His role in the bankruptcy of the company, which ended up costing Puerto Rican taxpayers $32.6 million, was significant but limited. That $32.6 million loss constituted 0.03 percent of the territory’s total $123 billion debt, which prompted the Puerto Rican government to file for bankruptcy relief in May 2017.

Wagner, Daniel. “The Island Resort That Trump Promised to Save (But So Didn’t).”   Buzzfeed.  12 October 2016.;Puerto Rico Industrial, Tourist, Educational, Medical and Environmental Control Facilities Financing Authority.  “Tourism Revenue Refunding Bonds, 2011 Series A — Trump International Golf Club Puerto Rico Project.”   24 March 2011.;Coco Beach Golf and Country Club.  “Annual Report 2012.”   31 October 2013.;United States Bankruptcy Court, District of Puerto Rico.  “In re: Coco Beach Golf and Country Club — List of Creditors Holding 20 Largest Unsecured Claims.”   13 July 2015.;Sherman, Amy.  “Did Bankrupt Trump Golf Course in Puerto Rico Leave Taxpayers on the Hook?”   Politifact.  4 May 2017.;Williams Walsh, Mary.  “Puerto Rico Declares a Form of Bankruptcy.”   The New York Times.  3 May 2017.

hurricane-irma-track-become-category-6-storm

hurricane-irma-track-become-category-6-storm

Hurricane Irma is projected to be so big that it may become a "Category 6" hurricane; that a new "Category 6" will be invented specifically for Hurricane Irma

In the wake of the destruction caused by Hurricane Harvey, and in light of the increasing strength of Hurricane Irma, numerous alarmist headlines have suggested that Irma is so strong that it should be identified as a “Category 6” hurricane. Many readers have written in to ask us if Irma is indeed classified as a Category 6. Is Irma a Category 6 storm? We can say with certainty that Hurricane Irma is not a Category 6 storm and will not become one because that category does not exist. The highest rating on the Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale is a five, which contains all storms with sustained winds greater than 157 mph. The idea that Irma is a Category 6 storm seems to have originated with a a blog post that implied that a new category, Category 6, would be created for Irma. While the post does not state this directly, its headline reads “Category 6? If Hurricane Irma Becomes The Strongest Hurricane In History, It Could Wipe Entire Cities Off The Map.” That story, written by end-time enthusiast and Republican candidate for Idaho’s first congressional district Michael Snyder, was first published on his blog “The Economic Collapse” before being aggregated by other clickbait websites. Are scientists going to create a new Hurricane Wind Scale Category for Irma? It is true that scientists have brought up the potential need for a new hurricane Category 6. But that discussion began well before the 2017 hurricane season. Snyder juxtaposes quotes about Irma with quotes about the need for a new Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale category in a way that is confusing for readers: < So how powerful could Irma eventually become? According to Michael Ventrice of the Weather Channel, Irma could easily become a “super typhoon” with “sustained speeds of over 180mph” […] The scale we have right now really never envisioned storms that powerful. In fact, some have suggested that we need to add a “category 6” to describe the kind of “super storms” that are now developing in the Atlantic. > A 2015 paper published in Nature Climate Change discussed the prospect of so-called grey swan storms, which the authors defined as “tropical cyclones […] that would not be predicted based on history but may be foreseeable using physical knowledge together with historical data.” Using modeling data, the scientists in that study argued that — due to a warming climate — the likelihood of such “grey swan” storms has increased from an essentially negligible level to low but significant level: < Grey swan tropical cyclones striking Tampa, Cairns and Dubai can generate storm surges of about 6 m, 5.7 m and 4 m, respectively, with estimated annual exceedance probabilities [the likelihood of a storm generating surges higher than that] of about 1/10,000. With climate change, these probabilities can increase significantly over the twenty-first century (to 1/3,100–1/1,100 in the middle and 1/2,500–1/700 towards the end of the century for Tampa). Worse grey swan tropical cyclones, inducing surges exceeding 11 m in Tampa and 7 m in Dubai, are also revealed with non-negligible probabilities, especially towards the end of the century. > While Snyder references a blog post that quotes the paper, he does not make it clear that the idea is now two years old — and has nothing to do with Irma. No scientist or meteorologist has suggested that Irma alone is reason to create a new category. It is true that Hurricane Irma is a strong and dangerous storm. According to the Washington Post’s Capital Weather Gang, it is “barreling toward the northern Lesser Antilles and Southern Florida [and is] already the strongest hurricane ever recorded outside the Caribbean and the Gulf of Mexico.” They added that it is “likely to make landfall somewhere in Florida over the weekend.” However, claims that the size of this specific storm was large enough to spawn discussion of a new hurricane wind category are based on general scientific discussions and not on the strength of Hurricane Irma.

NOAA National Hurricane Center.  “Saffir-Simpson Hurricane Wind Scale.”   Accessed 5 September 2017.;Snyder, Michael.  “Category 6? If Hurricane Irma Becomes The Strongest Hurricane In History, It Could Wipe Entire Cities Off The Map”   The Economic Collapse.  1 September 2017.;Masters, Jeff.  “Extreme ‘Grey Swan’ Hurricanes in Tampa Bay: a Potential Future Catastrophe.”   Weather Underground’s WonderBlog.  26 July 2016.;Linm Ning, and Emanuel, Kerry.  “Grey Swan Tropical Cyclones.”   Nature Climate Change.  31 August 2015.;NcNoldy, Brian, and Samenow, Jason.  “Catastrophic Hurricane Irma — Now a Cat 5 — Is on a Collision Course With Florida.”   Washington Post.  5 September 2017.

only-60-of-1566-churches-in-houston-opened-to-help-hurricane-harvey-victims

only-60-of-1566-churches-in-houston-opened-to-help-hurricane-harvey-victims

Only 60 of the 1,566 churches in Houston opened to help the victims of Hurricane Harvey.

On 29 August 2017, a satirical Facebook page called “The Cajun Navy” (not to be confused with the actual Cajun Navy, a nonprofit organization whose members have been conducting rescues of Harvey victims on the ground) posted a now-viral meme that appeared to exploit Internet-driven outrage over the misleading rumor that “Prosperity Gospel” preacher Joel Osteen had closed his 16,000-capacity megachurch in Houston to refugees from floodwaters caused by Tropical Storm Harvey, which made landfall in southeast Texas in late August 2017. The meme stated that only 60 of Houston’s 1,566 churches had opened their doors to flood victims. It was shared thousands of times although it provided no citation for the figures: < There are 1566 churches in Houston. They are all tax exempt. They are tax exempt so they can help the needy. Only 60 (4%) out of 1566 have opened their doors to help the flood victims and the needy during hurricane Harvey. Let that sink in for a moment. > “The Cajun Navy” page has shared several other posts mocking Osteen and his church for their response to Hurricane Harvey. Despite the fact none of the figures in the meme are attributed, it was picked up by a Huffington Post community blogger who used it as leverage in arguing that churches should be taxed because they do an inadequate job of providing charity. However, according to the Internal Revenue Service, religious organizations are tax exempt to promote religious freedom, not because they provide charity: < Congress has enacted special tax laws that apply to churches, religious organizations and ministers in recognition of their unique status in American society and of their rights guaranteed by the First Amendment of the Constitution of the United States. Churches and religious organizations are generally exempt from income tax and receive other favorable treatment under the tax law; however, certain income of a church or religious organization may be subject to tax, such as income from an unrelated business. > The meme was shared on 29 August 2017, just a few days after Hurricane Harvey made landfall in Texas — and it seems highly unlikely someone conducted a survey of all of the churches in Houston during this time. Although we don’t know the exact percentage of churches that opened their doors (or the number that couldn’t, due to flood damage), we have come across multiple reports of churches coming to the aid of those in need in the wake of Hurricane Harvey: < The firefighters put a call out for help, asking if anyone could take the evacuees in. One local youth pastor answered the call. The rescue teams picked up Pastor David McDougle, 26, and his wife from their flooded home so they could open the First Baptist Church North Houston as a makeshift shelter for those stranded. McDougle said he got a call Sunday evening asking if he would let evacuees sleep at the church, so he and his wife took all the food and water they had gotten and brought it to the church. Though they now have a roof over their heads, the church is not a designated shelter and has no food or water for the evacuees. The church reached capacity with nearly 300 people laying on the floor of the gym, and the food supply ran out around 5 a.m. People are nervous to drink tap water. The restrooms at the church will not flush, creating a mess of the place. Houston’s First Baptist Church, led by Pastor Greg Matte, is also participating in relief efforts, providing food and shelter to those in need. Pastor Kirbyjon Caldwell, a former faith adviser to George W. Bush and pastor of Windsor Village United Methodist Church, announced that as of Monday, his church would house those affected by another round of evacuations. > Max Moll, a spokesman for Houston Controller Chris Brown, told us that churches have in fact been helping in various capacities, depending on their ability and circumstance in relation to flood damage. Some have been volunteering while others have been donating clothing and other supplies. Others have opened their doors to shelter stranded residents. Moll told us: < It’s up to each individual entity to decide what they can and can’t do. Some [of the churches] are without power, or are flooded, or the roads around them are impassable. There are a lot of ways to respond and a lot of churches have responded in strong ways. > In general terms, the city has three official shelter locations where thousands are being housed — the George R. Brown Convention Center, the Toyota Center and NRG Center. Osteen told “CBS This Morning” that his church has been coordinating its relief efforts with the city and opened the church for shelter when the city’s overflowed: < We worked with the city constantly. The city set up a shelter about four miles from here that can house 10,000 people, showers, dormitories, kitchens, security, all that. They didn’t need us as a shelter at that point. They wanted us to be a distribution center. … When they filled up, they said “we need shelter,” we started our shelter. >

Shellnut, Kate.  “Houston Churches Fight Flooding After Harvey Cancels Services.”   Christianity Today.  28 August 2017.;Rombow, Dennis.  “Texas LDS Meetinghouse Becomes Shelter, Boat Command Center.”   Deseret News.  29 August 2017.;Sullivan, Kevin.  “Texas Officials Say at Least Nine Dead as Harvey Flooding Continues”   Washington Post.  28 August 2017.;LA Times.  “Why Don’t Churches Pay Taxes?”   23 September 2008.;McGowan Mellor, Gail. “One of the Most Telling Things I’ve Heard This Week.”   Huffington Post blog. 30 August 2017.;Internal Revenue Service. “Tax Guide for Churches & Religious Organizations.”

red-cross-harvey-meal

red-cross-harvey-meal

A photograph shows a meal served by the Red Cross to victims of Hurricane Harvey in Texas.

A host of rumors concerning the American Red Cross and their disaster relief efforts cropped up in September 2017 after a string of hurricanes battered the United States. Among them was a photograph that purportedly showed a meal served by the nonprofit organization in Texas after Hurricane Harvey: The pictured meal, consisting of some slices of ham and cheese, crackers, and cauliflower, actually shows a school lunch that was served to a student in Chickasha, Oklahoma in 2014: < Angry parents in Chickasha complain their kids aren’t getting enough to eat at school. The Holton family says the meal the district calls a “Munchable” is ridiculous and family members say it needs to change. The meal that daughter Kaytlin Shelton took a photo of Monday consists of lunch meat, a couple crackers, a slice of cheese and two pieces of cauliflower. Schools in Chickasha serve it every other week. > Kelly Tyco, a reporter for the newspaper TC Palm, posted a picture of a meal served by the Red Cross at a shelter at Hidden Oaks Middle School in Florida after Hurricane Irma. That mean included a hamburger, french fries, and fresh fruit and vegetables: < This was #HiddenOaksMiddle @RedCross #HurricaneIrma dinner. Shelter residents were appreciative of hot meals https://t.co/xjHh1Vkqlb @TCPalm pic.twitter.com/rwXBcmA6eO — Kelly Tyko (@TCPalmKelly) September 9, 2017 > A controversy over portion sizes did come up in September 2016 when the Red Cross provided meals to victims of severe flooding in Louisiana. Some meal recipients posted photographs apparently showing disturbingly small portion sizes: However, the scanty portions were not representative of all Red Cross meals served during that disaster. As we reported at the time: < The Red Cross acknowledged that some food boxes went out with ridiculously small portions: the result of an error, (Red Cross spokesman Jay) Bonafede said, which was subsequently corrected. The user who posted the chicken nuggets and peas photograph said he received an apology from the organization. > The Red Cross was also subjected to rumors holding that they were charging victims for their services (false), that they refused to serve hamburgers (mixture), and that they threw away hundreds of pounds of donations (unproven). In response, the nonprofit published a post on Facebook about the dangers of misinformation:

Chawla, Kiran.  “The Investigators: Why is Red Cross Serving Some Meals Viewers Call ‘Unacceptable’.”   WAFB.  31 August 2016.;Sylte, Allison.  “You Donated to the Red Cross. Here’s What Happens Next.”   9 News.  30 August 2017.

Law professor Alice Ristroph wrote in the Atlantic magazine that the 2017 solar eclipse, its path, or those who view it, are "racist."

In August 2017, two right-wing web sites reported that a law professor had said the 2017 Solar Eclipse was “racist.” First, on 20 August, the Daily Caller published an article headlined “The Eclipse is Racist Because it Fails to Affect Enough Black People, the Atlantic Suggests.” < The Atlantic, a once-great magazine, has determined that the total eclipse of the sun due to occur on Monday will fail to affect enough black people. > The following day, the Conservative Tribune claimed: < Are you looking forward to Monday’s solar eclipse — the first full eclipse to hit the United States in decades? You filthy, filthy racist. That’s at least the take of Brooklyn Law School professor Alice Ristroph, who used a staggering 4,544 words in The Atlantic to explaining why the phenomenon of the moon blocking the sun just wasn’t diverse enough for her tastes. > Both web sites are referring to an essay by Alice Ristroph, who is indeed a professor at Brooklyn Law School in New York. The essay, originally published in Democracy with the title “Blackout,” and republished by the Atlantic on 18 August, does not say say or even imply that the eclipse or the path of totality are racist. Nor does Ristroph say or imply that the eclipse will not be visible to “enough” black people, or that those who choose to view the eclipse are racists. Instead, Ristroph has written a lyric essay that uses the path of totality as a literary mechanism to explore the United States’ troubled racial history. The path of totality crosses a swath of the United States in which there live “almost no black people.” Ristroph is clear that this is a coincidence, but she uses the fact as an opportunity to examine the historical reasons that some of those areas remain almost all white. Along the way, she discusses different visions of “totality,” such as Oregon’s original goal of being an all-white state, or General William Tecumseh Sherman’s vision of “total war” during the U.S. Civil War. At no point does Ristroph use the word “racist”, and she explicitly makes the (blindingly obvious) point that the eclipse itself does not harbor any racial prejudice: < It has been dubbed the Great American Eclipse, and along most of its path, there live almost no black people. Presumably, this is not explained by the implicit bias of the solar system. It is a matter of population density, and more specifically geographic variations in population density by race, for which the sun and the moon cannot be held responsible. > The Daily Caller and Conservative Tribune’s misguided interpretations of Ristroph’s essay suggest a fundamental misunderstanding of it.Â

Ristroph, Alice.  “Blackout.”  Democracy.  14 August 2017.;Ristroph, Alice.  “American Blackout.”  Atlantic.  18 August 2017.

"trump" AND "first" AND "president" AND "visit" AND "western" AND "wall"

trump-first-western-wall

trump-first-western-wall

President Trump was the first U.S. president to visit the Western Wall.

On 23 May 2017, news outlets such as NBC News and CNN reported that Donald Trump was the first sitting United States President to visit the Western Wall, one of Judaism’s holiest sites, in Jerusalem: < President Donald Trump placed a note in the Western Wall in Jerusalem on Monday, becoming the first sitting U.S. president to visit one of Judaism’s holiest sites. Trump later called it a “great honor” to visit the wall, saying, “I can see a much deeper path, friendship with Israel.” The historic visit is part of Trump’s efforts to highlight “the need for unity among three of the world’s great religions” on his first foreign trip, senior administration officials said. > As this news circulated on social media, some of the details became obscured. For instance, the Facebook page Patriots for America USA shared an image of Trump at the wall along with a message claiming that he was the “first U.S. President” to visit the holy site: Barack Obama visited the Western Wall when he was a presidential candidate in 2008; George W. Bush visited the site in 1998, years before becoming president; Bill Clinton visited the wall after leaving office; and George H.W. Bush visited the wall as well, though not while in office. Although Trump was the not the first president to visit the Western Wall, he was the first sitting president to do so.Â

Rafferty, Andrew.  “Trump Becomes First Sitting U.S. President to Visit Western Wall”   NBC News.  23 May 2017.;McCarthy, Rory.  “Obama Makes Surprise Visit to Jerusalem’s Western Wall.”   The Guardian.  24 July 2008.;Kornblut, Anne.  “The Bushes and the Jews.”   Slate.  17 April 2002.

nasa-planetary-protection-officer

nasa-planetary-protection-officer

NASA will hire someone (with a secret security clearance) to ensure alien life doesn't make its way to Earth.

On 2 August 2017, USA Today reported on a NASA job posting for a “planetary protection officer” in a way that — while sure to boost page views — took serious liberties with the nature of, and need for, the position advertised. Several other web sites reprinted the USA Today article, using headlines like “NASA is Hiring Someone to Protect Earth from Aliens,” which stated: < The National Aeronautics and Space Administration is currently looking for someone with a secret security clearance to ensure alien life, or “organic-constituent and biological contamination” doesn’t make its way back in a space ship. > While this statement is technically true, it misrepresents of the nature of the work performed by the planetary protection officer — the most significant aspect of which is to prevent other planets and space objects from becoming contaminated by us. The NASA job posting makes this clear: < This position is assigned to Office of Safety and Mission Assurance for Planetary Protection. Planetary protection is concerned with the avoidance of organic-constituent and biological contamination in human and robotic space exploration. NASA maintains policies for planetary protection applicable to all space flight missions that may intentionally or unintentionally carry Earth organisms and organic constituents to the planets or other solar system bodies, and any mission employing spacecraft, which are intended to return to Earth and its biosphere with samples from extraterrestrial targets of exploration. This policy is based on federal requirements and international treaties and agreements. > And on their web site, the Planetary Protection Office also describes the two-way nature of the job: < Planetary protection is essential for several important reasons: to preserve our ability to study other worlds as they exist in their natural states; to avoid contamination that would obscure our ability to find life elsewhere — if it exists; and to ensure that we take prudent precautions to protect Earth’s biosphere in case it does. Typically, planetary protection is divided into two major components: forward contamination, which refers to the biological contamination of explored solar system bodies; and backward contamination, which refers to the biological contamination of Earth as a result of returned extraterrestrial samples. > This NASA position, and the concept of planetary protection in general, is far from new. The role of planetary protection officer dates back to 1963, when the organization formed a position they dubbed the planetary quarantine officer. This position was later reorganized to carry out NASA’s commitment to principles set forth in the 1967 “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies,” which says: < States Parties to the Treaty shall pursue studies of outer space, including the Moon and other celestial bodies, and conduct exploration of them so as to avoid their harmful contamination and also adverse changes in the environment of the Earth resulting from the introduction of extraterrestrial matter and, where necessary, shall adopt appropriate measures for this purpose. > By law, the position of planetary protection officer has a term-limit — three years with an option to extend the post by two years — necessitating regular job announcements. Given that NASA deals with classified defense projects, it is not shocking that the job would come with security clearance, either. The current planetary protection officer, Catharine Conley, spoke to Scientific American about the duties of her job: < The purpose is explicitly to protect the activities that humans want to do. Initially that would be science, but other things will be done in the future as well. If you wanted to drill into an aquifer on Mars, it would be in the interest of future colonists that you keep the drilling clean because organisms can grow in the aquifer and change the conditions so that it is no longer available. We’ve seen that happen on Earth. That would be really unfortunate. > Speaking in the forward of a NASA-published history of planetary protection, Conley described a personal experience that illustrated the importance of planetary protection: < My interest in planetary protection is much more personal. As part of my laboratory’s research on muscle atrophy, my first spaceflight experiment was flown on the last mission of the Space Shuttle Columbia that tragically disintegrated during reentry on 1 February 2003. Surprisingly, when we opened our recovered hardware several months after the accident, many of our experimental animals had survived the crash. Inadvertently, our research had demonstrated that, if properly shielded, even multicellular animals could survive a meteoritic-style entry event, one of the key steps required for the natural transport of living organisms between planetary bodies. This recognition makes it even more critical that we don’t carry life from Earth with us on missions to search for life elsewhere—otherwise, if we find some, we might not be able to tell the difference! > To be fair to USA Today, the job does involve protecting Earth from any potential biological contamination brought back home from space as well. For example, the upcoming Mars 2020 Rover mission has floated the idea of caching samples on the surface of the planet for later return to Earth by another mission. Such proposals must be evaluated by and designed in conjunction with the planetary protection officer to make sure nothing biologically native to Mars would contaminate Earth. However, the majority of missions in NASA’s immediate future are either Earth-observing missions or robotic missions to Mars or potentially far off rocky moons like Europa that will not return to Earth. That means much of the job will entail designing strategies to prevent the potential for contamination to these places from Earth, and not — as lightly suggested by USA Today — serving as an intergalactic “Men in Black” agent.Â

May, Ashley.  “NASA Is Hiring Someone to Protect Earth from Aliens”   USA Today.  2 August 2017.;NASA Office of Planetary Protection.  “Overview.”   Accessed 3 August 2017.;Phillips, Charles, R.  “The Planetary Quarantine Program: 1956-1973”   NASA History Office.  1974.;U.S. Department of State.  “Treaty on Principles Governing the Activities of States in the Exploration and Use of Outer Space, Including the Moon and Other Celestial Bodies.”   27 January 1967.;Biba, Erin.  “Meet NASA’s One and Only Planetary Protection Officer”;Meltzer, Michael.  When Biospheres Collide.   National Aeronautics and Space Administration, 2011.  9780160863272

crime-brown-allen-sentence

crime-brown-allen-sentence

David Mikkelson

Article contrasts disparate sentences given to Roy Brown and Paul R. Allen.

In 2011 the tale of two men in their mid-fifties with very different life circumstances attracted the attention of Internet users who juxtaposed their stories as an example of the disparity with which a wealthy, white-collar criminal was treated versus a homeless man who robbed a bank, but ultimately only took $100 because he was desperate and hungry. In 2011, Paul R. Allen, 55, of Oakton, Virginia, was sentenced to 40 months in prison after being convicted of fraud for participating in a $2.9 billion scheme that caused the mortgage and lending firm Taylor, Bean & Whitaker to go under. Two years earlier, Roy Brown, 54, a homeless African-American man, was sentenced to 15 years without the possibility of parole for robbing a bank in Shreveport, Louisiana. According to the scant reporting on the story, Brown only took $100 from the stack handed to him and told the teller he needed it because he was homeless and hungry. The two stories, of a CEO given a relatively lenient sentence for his involvement in a multi-billion dollar fraud scheme versus the homeless man who only took $100 from a bank, were compared — albeit with little detail: < The story of 54-year-old Roy Brown, a homeless man who couldn’t afford to pay basic food and shelter expenses, is heartbreakingly cruel: A homeless man robbed a Louisiana bank and took a $100 bill. After feeling remorseful, he surrendered to police the next day. The judge sentenced him to 15 years in prison. The day after this story appeared, prosecutors celebrated the fact that they were able to get a 40-month prison sentence for investment tycoon Paul R. Allen, who defrauded lenders of more than $3 billion. > There seems to be only one news account documenting the incident that landed Brown in prison: < A homeless man robbed a Louisiana bank and took a $100 bill. After feeling remorseful, he surrendered to police the next day. The judge sentenced him to 15 years in prison. Roy Brown, 54, robbed the Capital One bank in Shreveport, Louisiana in December 2007. He approached the teller with one of his hands under his jacket and told her that it was a robbery. The teller handed Brown three stacks of bill but he only took a single $100 bill and returned the remaining money back to her. He said that he was homeless and hungry and left the bank. The next day he surrendered to the police voluntarily and told them that his mother didn’t raise him that way. Brown told the police he needed the money to stay at the detox center and had no other place to stay and was hungry. In Caddo District Court, he pleaded guilty. The judge sentenced him to 15 years in prison for first degree robbery. > We were able to confirm Brown pleaded guilty to first degree robbery on 14 January 2009 and was sentenced to 15 years hard labor without the possibility of probation, parole or suspension of sentence, according to the Caddo Parish court clerk’s office. Brown is currently housed at Madison Parish Detention Center until the end of his sentence in 2022. According to a spokesman for the Louisiana Department of Public Safety and Corrections, Brown has the possibility for work release in 2018, meaning if granted he can leave detention to work during daytime hours. The news article about Brown does not mention factors such as prior convictions which may have affected Brown’s sentence. (In Louisiana, the crime of first degree robbery — the taking of something of value when the offender does not have a weapon, but leads the victim to believe that he does have a weapon — carries a minimum sentence of 3 years to a maximum of 40 years.) We are working to obtain records containing further details about his case. Allen was sent to prison for his part in aiding and abetting the efforts of TBW’s former chairman, Lee B. Farkas, to defraud the U.S. Treasury’s Troubled Asset Relief Program (TARP): < Allen was chief executive at Ocala, Fla.-based Taylor Bean & Whitaker, which collapsed in 2009 after the criminal investigation became public, resulting in its 2,000 employees losing their jobs. The fraud also contributed to the collapse of Alabama-based Colonial Bank — the sixth largest bank failure in U.S. history — after Colonial bought hundreds of millions of dollars in Taylor Bean mortgages that had already been sold to other investors. Two other banks — Deutsche Bank and BNP Paribas — lost nearly $2 billion after buying corporate paper from Taylor Bean that was not properly backed with collateral, authorities said. Taylor Bean and Colonial also tried to obtain more than $500 million from the government’s Troubled Asset Relief Program but ultimately never received any funding from the program also known as TARP. Neil Barofsky, who served as TARP’s special inspector general, said the Taylor Bean case was the most significant criminal prosecution to arise out of the nation’s financial crisis. The convictions of company chairman Lee Farkas and Allen represent some of the most high-profile executives in the housing and financial industries to receive prison time in the aftermath of the housing sector meltdown. > Mitigating factors in Allen’s sentencing were the fact that the fraud was already underway when he became CEO of TBW in 2003, that his crime was a non-violent one, and that Allen was one of six persons who received credit on their sentences for cooperating with investigators and testifying against Farkas, the mastermind of the fraud scheme. (Farkas himself was sentenced to thirty years in prison.)

KTBS-TV [Shreveport, LA].  “Man Who Took One Bill and Handed Rest Back to Bank Teller Gets 15-Year Sentence.”;15 January 2009.;Barakat, Matthew.  “Ex-Mortgage CEO Sentenced to Prison for $3B Fraud.”   22 June 2011.

fox-news-manafort-blackout-cheeseburger-emoji

fox-news-manafort-blackout-cheeseburger-emoji

Fox News didn't report breaking political news about the indictment of Paul Manafort and instead ran coverage of controversy involving a cheeseburger emoji.

 Conservative news did not make a meal of a silly emoji story about cheeseburgers instead of covering the federal investigation into alleged Russian election tampering. The indictment of Paul Manafort on 30 October 2017 trended across Twitter (with hashtags like #HappyIndictmentDay), as did a related meme suggesting that Fox News instituted a blackout of the political development in favor of reporting the same news carried on competitors MSNBC and CNN: < Paul Manafort just agreed to turn himself in to the FBI. What should we report on? CNN: Manafort MSNBC: Manafort Fox News: Hamburger emoji pic.twitter.com/Wjsvkb2coW — Roberto Ferdman (@robferdman) October 30, 2017 > < Manafort indictment being discussed on CNN and MSNBC, Fox covering cheeseburger emojis. #TrumpRussia #BenedictDonald — Becky Powers (@WildwoodFlower7) October 30, 2017 > < Manafort turns himself in 2 FBI. CNN: Manafort top story. MSNBC: Manafort breaking news. FOX: but where should cheese go on a cheeseburger?? pic.twitter.com/cG1eOQNmA5 — photopab (@PhotoPab) October 30, 2017 > It didn’t take long for the claim to take root as a literal assessment of Fox News’ 30 October 2017 programming schedule during breaking, high-interest political news: < When news of Manafort’s charges dropped Fox & Friends turned to the “controversial” cheeseburger emoji https://t.co/uUuPbKsmCs @AndrewKirell — Sam Stein (@samstein) October 30, 2017 > The Twitter timeline for @FoxAndFriends told a different story. Tweets concurrent with the show’s on-air reporting centered heavily on Manafort’s indictment — and we were unable to find any linking to content about a “cheeseburger emoji”: < .@JonathanTurley: #MuellerMonday is like the Academy Awards in Washington of who’s in the indictment envelope pic.twitter.com/seXBfP8wgf — FOX & friends (@foxandfriends) October 30, 2017 > During the apex of general coverage (at 8:18 AM EST and after), @FoxAndFriends tweeted: < FOX NEWS ALERT: Reports say Paul Manafort to turn himself in today pic.twitter.com/SjtjeinqCN — FOX & friends (@foxandfriends) October 30, 2017 > < Report: Paul Manafort, Rick Gates to surrender to special counsel https://t.co/iPPXwscjHD — FOX & friends (@foxandfriends) October 30, 2017 > However, Fox was not the only major news network to cover the cheeseburger emoji controversy on the same day the indictment made headlines: < Cheeseburger Emoji Debate: Apple vs. Google https://t.co/6ofKjsKAja #DigCommSU — Erin Devost (@ErinDevostPR) October 30, 2017 > Although it appears that the meme began as a joke about Fox News covering a cheeseburger emoji controversy in lieu of the topical events surrounding Paul Manafort, it quickly became something people on social media believed was literally the case. Independent fact-checking site Shooting the Messenger moved quickly to debunk the story: < But did the famously Trump-friendly news network really fail to report Manafort’s indictment in favour of Google’s apparent emoji cheeseburger crisis? The answer, unfortunately for Hannity-haters everywhere, is no. As this clip from this morning’s Fox & Friends shows, the bulk of airtime was spent in anticipation of the indictment, with the emoji story briefly appearing to pad out the show between updates…. The story later made an appearance as part of a brief news round-up that aired immediately before a commercial break. > By comparison, CNN also covered the emoji debate, yet Twitter focused on the early morning show’s comprehensive coverage of the Manafort news.

Kirell, Andrew.  “How ‘Fox & Friends’ Comforted Its Viewers (Trump) Amid Manafort News.”   The Daily Beast.  30 October 2017.

water-diseases-texas-harvey

water-diseases-texas-harvey

Floodwaters in parts of Southeast Texas tested positive for diseases and contaminants including typhoid fever and MRSA in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey.

MOSTLY FALSE

In September 2017, a viral rumor spread on Facebook, reporting that the waters in southeast Texas had tested positive for a variety of potentially harmful contaminants and diseases. The message typically read:

Texas Commission on Environmental Quality.  “EPA/TCEQ: Updated Status of Systems Affected by Harvey.”  TCEQ.Texas.gov.  11 September 2017.;Scutti, Susan.  “Sewage, Fecal Bacteria in Hurricane Harvey Floodwaters.”  CNN.  2 September 2017.;Kaplan, Sheila; Healy, Jack.  “Houston’s Floodwaters Are Tainted, Testing Shows.”  New York Times.  11 September 2017.

facts-about-slavery

facts-about-slavery

A circulating list of nine historical "facts" about slavery accurately details the participation of non-whites in slave ownership and trade in America.

One of the less well known aspects of the history of slavery is how many and how often non-whites owned and traded slaves in early America. Free black slave holders could be found at one time or another “in each of the thirteen original states and later in every state that countenanced slavery,” historian R. Halliburton Jr. observed. That black people bought and sold other black people raises “vexing questions” for 21st-century Americans like African-American writer Henry Louis Gates Jr., who writes that it betrays class divisions that have always existed within the black community. For others, it’s an excuse to deflect the shared blame for the institution of slavery in America away from white people. In the latter vein, a “9 Facts About Slavery They Don’t Want You to Know” meme lays out a mixture of true, false and misleading historical claims. We’ll address each one in turn below: The first legal slave owner in American history was a black tobacco farmer named Anthony Johnson. Possibly true. The wording of the statement is important. Anthony Johnson was not the first slave owner in American history, but he was, according to historians, among the first to have his lifetime ownership of a servant legally sanctioned by a court. A former indentured servant himself, Anthony Johnson was a “free negro” who owned a 250-acre farm in Virginia during the 1650s, with five indentured servants under contract to him. One of them, a black man named John Casor, claimed that his term of service had expired years earlier and Johnson was holding him illegally. In 1654, a civil court found that Johnson in fact owned Casor’s services for life, an outcome historian R Halliburton Jr. calls “one of the first known legal sanctions of slavery — other than as a punishment for crime.” North Carolina’s largest slave holder in 1860 was a black plantation owner named William Ellison. False. William Ellison was a very wealthy black plantation owner and cotton gin manufacturer who lived in South Carolina (not North Carolina). According to the 1860 census (in which his surname was listed as “Ellerson”), he owned 63 black slaves, making him the largest of the 171 black slaveholders in South Carolina, but far from the largest overall slave holder in the state. American Indians owned thousands of black slaves. True. Historian Tiya Miles provided this snapshot of the Native American ownership of black slaves at the turn of the 19th century for Slate magazine in January 2016: < Miles places the number of enslaved people held by Cherokees at around 600 at the start of the 19th century and around 1,500 at the time of westward removal in 1838-9. (Creeks, Choctaws, and Chickasaws, she said, held around 3,500 slaves, across the three nations, as the 19th century began.) “Slavery inched its way slowly into Cherokee life,” Miles told me. “When a white man moved into a Native location, usually to work as a trader or as an Indian agent, he would own [African] slaves.” If such a person also had a child with a Native woman, as was not uncommon, the half-European, half-Native child would inherit the enslaved people (and their children) under white law, as well as the right to use tribal lands under tribal law. This combination put such people in a position to expand their wealth, eventually operating large farms and plantations. > In 1830 there were 3,775 free black people who owned 12,740 black slaves. Approximately true, according to historian R. Halliburton Jr.: < There were approximately 319,599 free blacks in the United States in 1830. Approximately 13.7 per cent of the total black population was free. A significant number of these free blacks were the owners of slaves. The census of 1830 lists 3,775 free Negroes who owned a total of 12,760 slaves. > Many black slaves were allowed to hold jobs, own businesses, and own real estate. Somewhat true. There were exceptions, but generally speaking — especially after 1750, by which time slave codes had been entered into the law books in most of the American colonies — black slaves were not legally permitted to own property or businesses. From the Oxford Companion to American Law (2002): < Under these early codes, slaves had virtually no legal rights IN most areas they could be executed for crimes that were not capital offenses for whites. Their testimony was restricted in legal cases and could not be used either for or against whites. Trials of slaves were usually by special courts. Slaves could not own property, move about without consent of their owners, or legally marry. > Brutal black-on-black slavery was common in Africa for thousands of years. True, in the sense that the phenomenon of human beings enslaving other human beings goes back thousands of years, but not just among blacks, and not just in Africa. Most slaves brought to America from Africa were purchased from black slave owners. Sort of true. Historian Steven Mintz describes the situation more accurately in the introduction to his book African-American Voices: A Documentary Reader, 1619-1877: < Apologists for the African slave trade long argued that European traders did not enslave anyone: they simply purchased Africans who had already been enslaved and who otherwise would have been put to death. Thus, apologists claimed, the slave trade actually saved lives. Such claims represent a gross distortion of the facts. Some independent slave merchants did in fact stage raids on unprotected African villages and kidnap and enslave Africans. Most professional slave traders, however, set up bases along the west African coast where they purchased slaves from Africans in exchange for firearms and other goods. Before the end of the seventeenth century, England, France, Denmark, Holland, and Portugal had all established slave trading posts on the west African coast. Yet to simply say that Europeans purchased people who had already been enslaved seriously distorts historical reality. While there had been a slave trade within Africa prior to the arrival of Europeans, the massive European demand for slaves and the introduction of firearms radically transformed west and central African society. A growing number of Africans were enslaved for petty debts or minor criminal or religious offenses or following unprovoked raids on unprotected villages. An increasing number of religious wars broke out with the goal of capturing slaves. European weapons made it easier to capture slaves. > Slavery was common for thousands of years. True, as noted above — though how “common” slavery has been and what the specific nature of that slavery was has varied according to time and place. White people ended legal chattel slavery. It’s rather self-serving to claim that “white people” ended legal chattel slavery in the United States (much less ended chattel slavery, period), given that the overwhelming majority of blacks in the U.S. could not vote, could not run for political office, and, in every other way conceivable, were excluded from institutional power. Moreover, even as some white people were laboring to put an end to slavery, many others were fighting to preserve it. Slavery was eliminated in America via the efforts of people of various ethnicities, including Caucasians, who took up the banner of the abolitionist movement. The names of the white leaders of that movement tend to be better known than those of the black leaders, among whom were David Walker, Frederick Douglass, Dred Scott, Harriet Tubman, Sojourner Truth, Nat Turner, and many others. When Congress passed (and the states ratified) the 13th Amendment in 1865, it was the culmination of many years of work by that multi-racial movement.

Davis, J.B.  “Slavery in the Cherokee Nation.”   Chronicles of Oklahoma, Vol. 11, No. 4.  December 1993.;Gates Jr., Henry Louis.  “Did Black People Own Slaves?”   The Root.  4 March 2013.;Gates Jr., Henry Louis.  “How Many Slaves Landed in the U.S.?”   The Root.  6 January 2014.;Hall, Kermit L.  The Oxford Companion to American Law.   New York: Oxford University Press USA, 2002. ISBN 0-195-08878-6.;Halliburton Jr., R.  “Free Black Owners of Slaves: A Reappraisal of the Woodson Thesis.”   The South Carolina Historical Magazine, Vol. 76, No. 3.  July 1975.;Johnson, Michael P. and Roark, James L.  Black Masters: A Free Family of Color in the Old South.   New York: W. W. Norton, 1986.  ISBN 0-393-30314-4.;Mintz, Steven.  African-American Voices: A Documentary Reader, 1619-1877.   New York: John Wiley & Sons, 2009.  ISBN 1-444-31077-1.;Onion, Rebecca.  “America’s Other Original Sin.”  &nbsp em>Slate.  January 2016.;Rodriguez, Junius P.  The Historical Encyclopedia of World Slavery.   Santa Barbara: ABC-CLIO, 1997.  ISBN 0-874-36885-5.;Russell, John Henderson.  The Free Negro in Virginia, 1619-1865.   Baltimore: Johns Hopkins Press, 1913.  ISBN 1-480-03049-X.;Walton, Hanes and Smith, Robert C.  American Politics and the African American Quest for Universal Freedom.   London: Routledge, 2015.  ISBN 1-317-35045-6.

directv-nfl-refunds

directv-nfl-refunds

DIRECTV is offering refunds to NFL package subscribers to express dissatisfaction over national anthem protests

In the midst of a September 2017 controversy over a protest movement among professional football players to “take a knee” or stay in their locker rooms during pre-game renditions of the U.S. national anthem, social media rumors and news content suggested that satellite television company DIRECTV was offering refunds of NFL Sunday Ticket subscriptions to disgruntled customers: < Good news, @DIRECTV customers! They’ve just announced they’re refunding money to ppl offended by TV programs. Hit them up for details. — Amy Bradley-Hole (@amybhole) September 27, 2017 > < Direct TV will allow you to CANCEL your NFL Sunday package, and REFUND U if it’s because of protest! pic.twitter.com/DaXHQIxpax — Deplorable Lori Nor (@LoriNor85730053) September 26, 2017 > The Wall Street Journal (WSJ) published a far-from-definitive report about the rumor, stating that “at least some” customers could cancel their subscriptions by citing dissatisfaction with the protests, although DIRECTV’s policy did normally allow for such cancellations: < DirecTV is letting at least some customers cancel subscriptions to its Sunday Ticket package of NFL games and obtain refunds if they cite players’ national anthem protests as the reason, customer service representatives said. Sunday Ticket’s regular policy doesn’t allow refunds once the season is under way. But the representatives said they are making exceptions this season — which began in September — in response to the protests, in which players kneel or link arms during the national anthem. Spokesmen for DirecTV-parent AT&T Inc. and the National Football League declined to comment. > Nonetheless, the WSJ’s reporting indicated information about DIRECTV’s purportedly making exceptions to their cancellation policy was inconsistent: < DirecTV service representatives contacted by The Wall Street Journal had different understandings of the policy. One said refunds to those concerned about the anthem protests were only offered to subscribers with certain offers or plans. One representative said full refunds were available for those who complained about anthem protests. Another said such people could only get prorated refunds for the remainder of the season. Yet other representatives said the policy hadn’t changed and that no refunds were allowed for any reason. However, DirecTV subscribers contacted by The Wall Street Journal showed the satellite broadcaster was offering at least some refunds. > Other news reports on the subject frequently cited the WSJ (and not DIRECTV) as a source, and none of them referenced any official “announcement” from the satellite TV provider: < DirecTV is offering unprecedented refunds for fans who want to cancel their NFL Sunday Ticket package, if they inform the company that they are doing so due to the recent protests during the national anthem, a source confirmed. Once the season starts, fans usually cannot cancel their subscriptions, but AT&T, which owns DirecTV, decided to change the policy due to the sensitivity of the issue. The price of the package, which allows fans to get out-of-market games, is about $280. An AT&T spokesperson declined to confirm the cancellation policy and said the company would have no numbers to share. > Some versions of the rumor stated that DIRECTV had “announced” an NFL subscription refund policy specifically linked to the protests. But comments posted to DIRECTV’s Facebook wall by customers appeared to fall into two camps — some subscribers merely repeated the rumor, while others reported they had been unable to obtain refunds: Some customer tweets suggested that subscribers had been able to negotiate NFL package cancellations with DIRECTV individually, not as part of a policy enacted by the TV provider: < There are roughly 2 million @directv Sunday Ticket subscribers. At roughly $350 cost, it only takes 3k customers to cost company $1 million. — Clay Travis (@ClayTravis) September 27, 2017 > < Cancelled my @DIRECTV NFL ticket this morning. Got a $188.00 credit — Paul (@PaulcTynan) September 26, 2017 > < FYI-Just got a full refund from #DirectTV for #SundayTicket. I told them I didn’t agree with the Anthem protests and it was cancelled no ?’s — His Goddess (@Domestic_Venus) September 26, 2017 > < DIRECTV is letting us cancel NFL pkg. had to threaten to go with cable. Took half hour of arguing with them. They are getting lots of calls. — MB Taurus (@HeirloomCore) September 25, 2017 > Some subscribers reported terminating their DIRECTV service entirely after being unable to obtain NFL Sunday Ticket refunds, while others said that DIRECTV had changed their policy to make NFL cancellations even more difficult: < “NoRefund from #DirectTV so I cancelled ” Not Paying to watch Kneelers Disrespect Our Flag & Country. #WednesdayThoughts #WednesdayWisdom pic.twitter.com/Wtl3Ugo66M — TresDeplorable (@TresDeplorable) September 27, 2017 > < #DirectTV NFL Sunday ticket changed policy yesterday – cannot cancel services without being charged…how convenient#BoycottNFL — Eye Spy (@dj_dwjohns1) September 25, 2017 > < @DIRECTV can I be let out of my contract because I disagree with your recent Sunday ticket refund change? — John Brody (@dayizzokid) September 27, 2017 > We contacted DIRECTV via Facebook and Twitter in an attempt to obtain clarification of their purported NFL cancellation policy, but we were unable to reach anyone in their media relations department. We also could not locate any responses from DIRECTV to offended subscribers in which the company definitively stated they had put any such policy in place.

Flint, Joe et al.  “DirecTV Allows Some NFL Refunds After Anthem Controversy.”   The Wall Street Journal.  26 September 2017.;Moritz, Scott.  “AT&T’s DirecTV Is Giving Refunds on NFL Packages Due to Protests.”   Bloomberg.  26 September 2017.;Rovell, Darren.  “Source: Fans Upset by Protests Can Get Sunday Ticket Refunds.”   ESPN.  26 September 2017.

fbi-wasserman-schultz-home

fbi-wasserman-schultz-home

FBI agents raided Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz's home and seized smashed computer hard drives.

On 24 July 2017, dubious web site FreedomDaily.com posted a story containing the claim that Rep. Debbie Wasserman-Schultz (D-Florida) had been the subject of a raid by federal officials because of an investigation into her former aide, 37-year-old Imran Awan. According to the story, FBI agents “seized smashed computers and hard drives” from the lawmaker’s home. But the Daily Caller story cited by FreedomDaily.com contradicts that argument, saying that it was Awan — not her — who had lived on the premises: < FBI agents seized smashed computer hard drives from the home of Florida Democratic Rep. Debbie Wasserman Schultz’s information technology (IT) administrator, according to two sources with knowledge of the investigation. > The report also describes the site of the alleged raid as “Wasserman-Shultz’s home that had previously belonged to the Muslim IT administrator,” but that statement is also debunked by the Daily Caller story, which states that the equipment was reported by an unidentified couple who took over the Virginia home after Awan “abruptly” moved out in February 2017: < One of the new tenants — a Marine Corps veteran married to a female Navy Officer — said he found “wireless routers, hard drives that look like they tried to destroy, laptops, [and] a lot of brand new expensive toner.” The tenants called the Naval Criminal Investigative Service and, not long after, FBI agents arrived together with the Capitol Police to interview them and confiscate the equipment. The Marine spoke on condition of anonymity because of concerns for his wife’s naval career, saying she doesn’t want to be associated with a national security incident. “It was in the garage. They recycled cabinets and lined them along the walls. They left in a huge hurry,” the Marine said. “It looks like government-issued equipment. We turned that stuff over.” > We contacted not only the FBI, but Capitol Police and the U.S. Attorney’s office for the District of Columbia, all of whom refused to comment on whether any hard drives had been taken from Awan’s former home. Awan was arrested on 24 July 2017 at Dulles International Airport in Virginia while trying to leave the U.S. He was fired from Wasserman-Schultz’s office the following day. Wasserman-Schultz terminated Awan’s employment months after he and his wife, Hina Alvi, were fired by two of Wasserman-Schultz’s colleagues, Rep. Marcia Fudge (D-Ohio) and Rep. Gregory Meeks (D-New York), respectively. Awan was accused of providing false information to the Congressional Federal Credit Union while seeking a loan. He pleaded not guilty to one count of bank fraud, and was released on the condition that he wear a GPS monitor, turn over all of his passports, remain within 50 miles of his current home, and abide by a curfew. A grand jury indicted Awan and Alvi on 17 August 2017 on charges of bank fraud, conspiracy to commit bank fraud, engaging in unlawful monetary transactions, and making false statements on a loan or credit application. Awan is due back in court on 21 August 2017 for a preliminary hearing. The couple and three other men — Awan’s relatives Abid Awan and Jamal Awan and Rao Abbas — have been under investigation by Capitol Police since February 2017 for allegedly stealing equipment from various House Democrats and misuse of the House’s internet technology system.

Rosiak, Luke.   “EXCLUSIVE: FBI Seized Smashed Hard Drives From Wasserman Schultz IT Aide’s Home.”    Daily Caller.  23 July 2017.;Bowden, John.  “Wasserman Schultz Staffer Arrested Trying to Leave the Country.”   The Hill.  25 July 2017.;Caygle, Heather.   “House Democrats Fire Two IT Staffers Amid Criminal Investigation.”   Politico.  1 March 2017.;Caygle, Heather.   “House Staffers Under Criminal Investigation For Alleged Equipment Theft.”   Politico.   2 February 2017.

mantle-yankees-crude-stadium-officials

mantle-yankees-crude-stadium-officials

David Mikkelson

Mickey Mantle sent a crude response when Yankees publicity officials asked him to describe his "outstanding event" at Yankee Stadium.

In June 2006 we began receiving purported reproductions of a correspondence between New York Yankees vice president Robert Fishel and Yankees slugger Mickey Mantle. It consisted of a form letter (linked above) sent by the club to a number of former players at the end of 1972, requesting that each recipient — in anticipation of a 1973 oldtimers game that would mark the 50th anniversary of Yankee Stadium — indicate what he considered his “outstanding event” at that ballpark. In the bottom portion of the form letter, purportedly filled out and signed by Mantle himself, the superstar outfielder described his “outstanding experience” at Yankee Stadium in rather crude terms as a particular sexual act performed “under the right field bleachers,” ironically signing his response as “The All-American Boy”: The response attributed to the Mick is indeed a real one, as detailed by Mantle biographer Jane Leavy: < In 1973, when the Yankees celebrated the fiftieth anniversary of the House That Ruth Built, the public relations department sent a questionnaire to former players. [Yankees publicity director] Marty Appel, who crafted the questionnaire, and received and edited the infamous reply (substituting [Mantle’s ninth-inning home run that won Game 3 of the 1964 World Series for the Yankees]), gave the original document to Barry Halper, the minority team owner and memorabilia maven who would later sell his vast collection for more than $30 million. The X-rated writing sample circulated through the baseball underground for years before emerging into the LED glare of the World Wide Web. Appel was appalled. Mantle was just trying to shock the Yankees’ straitlaced PR chief, Bob Fishel, he said. Absent Mantle’s impeccable 1930s Palmer Method penmanship, the asterisks, and the appellation, it’s just another example of locker room crude. The self-mocking touches turn it into something altogether different and far more interesting — a send-up of Yankee grandiosity and a self-knowing appraisal. Who knew he had a sense of irony? “That may be the best thing I’ve ever heard about him,” said Robert Pinsky, the bard of Red Sox partisans, and the former poet laureate of the United States. “He’s saying, ‘I am not going to be your all-American boy.'” >

Falkner, David.  “The Last Days of Mickey Mantle.”   Dallas Observer.  14 December 1995.;Leavy, Jane.  The Last Boy: Mickey Mantle and the End of America’s Childhood.   New York: Harper, 2010.  ISBN 0-060-88352-9  (pp. 300-301).

puerto-rico-food-stamps

puerto-rico-food-stamps

The Department of Agriculture rejected a request by Puerto Rico that Nutrition Assistance Program rules be waived so that food stamps recipients could use EBT cards to purchase hot food.

With relief and recovery efforts still under way in Puerto Rico, after a series of hurricanes in the fall of 2017, reports emerged on 3 October that the Trump administration had denied the United States commonwealth the same food stamp assistance earlier given to the hurricane-stricken states of Texas and Florida. We received several enquiries from readers about the veracity of these reports. The Hill reported that Trump had denied Puerto Rico’s request to “let hurricane victims use food stamps for prepared hot meals.” The web site’s original article has been updated, but an apparent excerpt from the original piece on the Democratic Underground blog reads: < Puerto Rico Gov. Ricardo Rosselló says the federal government has denied the U.S. territory’s request for its citizens to redeem food stamps for ready-to-eat hot meals, amid widespread food shortages and power outages in the aftermath of Hurricane Maria. > That information, according to the updated article on The Hill, came from an earlier New York Times report, which has itself been updated and now reads: < Though Mr. Rosselló said on Tuesday that the federal government had denied a request to allow hurricane victims in Puerto Rico to use food stamps at fast-food restaurants and other places that serve prepared hot meals, officials at the Department of Agriculture, which oversees the federal nutrition program, said they sent a letter to Puerto Rico on Sept. 30 approving a waiver that would allow food-stamp recipients to use their benefits to buy hot food. > Under normal circumstances, the rules of the Nutrition Assistance Program (NAP, commonly known as food stamps) mean electronic benefit transfer (EBT) cards cannot be used to purchase these kinds of foods. Texas and Florida have successfully asked the Food and Nutrition Service (FNS), the Department of Agriculture agency that oversees NAP, for temporary emergency waivers on this rule in light of the damage caused by hurricanes in those states. In a press conference on Tuesday 3 October, Ricardo Rosselló said that Puerto Rico had petitioned the federal government for a waiver on hot food and fast-food restaurants, and that he hoped to receive that waiver. The relevant section of this video of Rosselló’s press conference starts at 1.20. < I have submitted a petition so that FNS [the Food and Nutrition Service] can – so we can request a waiver for FNS so that some of the food stamps and the moneys provided to the most vulnerable population could be used for purchasing in fast food establishments with pre-made foods. The reason being that this will give accessibility to the people of Puerto Rico to get prepared and hot food, and as we’re seeing, a lot of these establishments are starting to develop effectiveness. So we’ve made that petition, and expect a waiver so that the people of Puerto Rico that depend on this can actually get some hot food for them and for their families. > However, we know that a request for a “hot food” waiver made by Puerto Rico’s Department of Family and Children on 28 September was agreed to by the Food and Nutrition Service on 30 September – three days before Rosselló’s remarks. This is made clear in a letter included in The Hill’s updated article. Later in the press conference, though, Rosselló says a previous request for a hot food waiver was denied. The relevant exchange there starts at around the 34.45 mark. His comments were made in Spanish, but can be translated as follows: < There was an initial request made at a lower level, which was denied. > This was reflected in a report about the press conference by the Puerto Rican news web site El Nuevo Dia, which wrote (translated from Spanish): < The Governor said there was an initial petition to the federal government so that NAP recipients could purchase prepared food, but that was denied, so this new petition is a reconsideration. > It’s not clear whether the governor was erroneously referring to the 28 September request as having been denied, or referring to an earlier request, while erroneously describing the 28 September request as still pending. We were unable to contact the offices of either Puerto Rico’s governor or Secretary of Family and Children, who made the 28 September request. In a statement, the U.S. Department of Agriculture told us they were not aware of any earlier request for a hot food waiver, but had given the Puerto Rican government “technical assistance” on that issue. The Department of Agriculture provided us the following chronology of correspondence, requests and responses surrounding the suspension of food stamps rules in Puerto Rico: We were unable to contact the offices of either Governor Rosselló or the Department of Family and Children, in order to ask whether they regard this timeline as complete and accurate. Phone service is still down for much of the island. The 30 September letter – published by The Hill in its updated article – was written by Patricia Dombroski, Mid-Atlantic Region Administrator for the Department of Agriculture’s Food and Nutrition Service, and addressed to Glorimar Andujar-Matos, Secretary of Family and Children in Puerto Rico. Among other provisions, it states that: < We approve the request to waive your state plan requirements and allow hot foods to be purchased at certified retailers utilizing the EBT portion of the NAP card, and allow the cash portion for purchases of hot foods at any retail outlet for the months of October and November. > However, the Food and Nutrition Service did not agree to every food stamps-related request made by Puerto Rico’s Department of Family and Children. The department had requested that the cash portion of each recipient’s monthly NAP allotment should be increased from 20 percent to 50-100 percent – meaning recipients would have been able to withdraw half or even all their food stamps allocation as cash. The FNS denied this request, and instead decided to postpone for two months a new rule which would have lowered the cash portion from 20 percent to 15 percent. The rule was originally due to kick in at the start of October. On 3 October, Governor Ricardo Rosselló wrote to Agriculture Secretary Sonny Perdue to ask him to reconsider that denial, and the request is pending, as of 5 October 2017.Â

Weixel, Nathaniel. “Trump Officials Allow Puerto Ricans to Use Food Stamps for Hot Food.”  The Hill. 3 October 2017.;Healy, Jack; Robles, Frances; Nixon, Ron. “Aid is Getting to Puerto Rico. Distributing it Remains a Challenge.”  New York Times. 3 October 2017.;El Nuevo Dia. “Rosseló Pide una Reconsideración para Flexibilizar Requisitos del PAN.”  El Nuevo Dia. 3 October 2017.

obama-attach-personal-message-letter-wrote-trump

obama-attach-personal-message-letter-wrote-trump

President Barack Obama put a threatening message in a letter he left for incoming President Donald Trump.

In September 2017, repeat offender Our Land of the Free published an article reporting that former United States President Barack Obama left a personal message to his successor President Donald Trump in the Oval Office, the contents of which remained unrevealed for several months: < Senior Correspondent Art Tubolls reports from the White House that the letter released to the media from former President Obama to President Trump is an incomplete, watered down version presented by the fake news media: “President Trump was very clear that he wanted the entire letter released but several agencies pushed him to reconsider. the media then made the final decision, telling the WHOIP that they absolutely would not carry such a private message that would be ‘twisted’ by the alt-right. We instead decided to release the personal message through back channels so the truth would be known without hurting the feelings of the poor ‘news’ networks that would have had to report it.” The personal message, added to the letter as a post-script on a second sheet of paper, reads: “On a personal note, this country has fought back hard from the recession your pals caused. If you destroy everything the American people have rebuilt I will come for you. You have no friends in this town. You’ve been warned. ~B.” > The letter itself is real. Obama did in fact leave a personal note for Trump, continuing a long and friendly tradition of outgoing presidents welcoming (and sometimes warning) the next U.S. leader. The actual letter, which Donald Trump showed to Oval Office visitors, reads as follows: < Congratulations on a remarkable run. Millions have placed their hopes in you, and all of us, regardless of party, should hope for expanded prosperity and security during your tenure. This is a unique office, without a clear blueprint for success, so I don’t know that any advice from me will be particularly helpful. Still, let me offer a few reflections from the past 8 years. First, we’ve both been blessed, in different ways, with great good fortune. Not everyone is so lucky. It’s up to us to do everything we can (to) build more ladders of success for every child and family that’s willing to work hard. Second, American leadership in this world really is indispensable. It’s up to us, through action and example, to sustain the international order that’s expanded steadily since the end of the Cold War, and upon which our own wealth and safety depend. Third, we are just temporary occupants of this office. That makes us guardians of those democratic institutions and traditions — like rule of law, separation of powers, equal protection and civil liberties — that our forebears fought and bled for. Regardless of the push and pull of daily politics, it’s up to us to leave those instruments of our democracy at least as strong as we found them. And finally, take time, in the rush of events and responsibilities, for friends and family. They’ll get you through the inevitable rough patches. Michelle and I wish you and Melania the very best as you embark on this great adventure, and know that we stand ready to help in any ways which we can. Good luck and Godspeed, BO > Although there legitimately is a tradition of outgoing U.S. presidents leaving letters for the next person who assumes the position, Our Land of the Free’s interpretation of it is not legitimate. An often-overlooked (or, perhaps, ignored) disclaimer notice on the web site’s “About” page warned all of its content should be considered “fake news“: < Ourlandofthefree.com makes no guarantee that anything you find here will be based at all in reality. All posts should be considered satirical and all images photoshopped to look like something they’re not. We believe in the right to be free. No matter what, the freedom to do what we want, say what we want and publish what we want comes first. Therefore we make no guarantee that what you read here is true. In fact, it most definitely is not. Our Land Of The Free is here to entertain you with the kind of whimsical satire conservatives enjoy. >

trump-uk-terrorism

trump-uk-terrorism

A 13 percent increase in police-recorded crime in England and Wales is linked to a rise in 'radical Islamic terror.'

MOSTLY FALSE

President Donald Trump made an eye-catching claim early on the morning of 20 October 2017, linking or attributing a 13 percent annual increase in crime in the “U.K.” with the “spread of radical Islamic terror.” < Just out report: “United Kingdom crime rises 13% annually amid spread of Radical Islamic terror.” Not good, we must keep America safe! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) October 20, 2017 > The statistical report Trump is alluding to actually relates specifically to England and Wales and not the U.K., which also includes Scotland and Northern Ireland. In any case – Trump’s linking of Islamist terrorism to a 13 percent rise in recorded crime “in the U.K.” (or in England and Wales, for that matter) is grossly misleading. The source of his claim appears to have been a segment aired on the conservative One America News Network (OANN) just a few minutes before he sent his tweet. As reported by Media Matters, the OANN segment carried a graphic that read: “Migrant Crisis – Report: U.K. Crime Rises 13% Annually Amid Spread of Radical Islamic Terror.” The segment can be viewed here. OANN states that the rise in crime was driven by increases in violent and sexual offenses and harassment. Without citing any evidence, the report claims “Officials speculate the surge in crime may have resulted from the mass migration and spread of violent ideologies including Sharia law and radical Islam.” In reality, no U.K. official has said this, and migration from outside the European Union actually slowed in the year ending March 2017, as compared to the year before that. The Overall Rise in Police-Recorded Crime On 19 October 2017, the U.K.’s Office of National Statistics published its June 2017 Crime Survey of England and Wales (CSEW). As part of the presentation of the CSEW, the Office of National Statistics (ONS) included statistics on offenses recorded by police in the 12 months ending in June 2017. The data show that between July 2016 and June 2017, police recorded a total of 5,156,928 offenses in England and Wales, an increase of 583,782 offenses (12.77 percent) from the number recorded between July 2015 and June 2016, which was 4,573,146. (Table A4.) The ONS offers this context for that rise: < The 13% increase in police recorded crime from the previous year reflects a range of factors including continuing improvements to crime recording and genuine increases in some crime categories, especially in those that are well-recorded. > To be included in the crime statistics, an offense does not need to culminate in a criminal conviction, or even an arrest. It need only be reported to police, or recorded by police. Known Islamist Terror Offenses vs Other Offenses The police-recorded crime statistics include 35 homicides and 294 attempted murder offenses relating to three Islamist terrorist attacks during the past 12 months: the March 2017 Westminster attack, the May 2017 Manchester Arena bombing, and the June 2017 London Bridge attack. A separate October 2017 briefing paper for the House of Commons states that there were 379 arrests relating to terrorism in the year ending June 2017, an increase of 153 on the previous 12 months. Around 75 percent of these arrests related to “international terrorism” (Islamist terrorism, largely speaking.) So let’s add an estimated 115 additional reported crimes to those homicides and attempted murder offenses. That’s a total of 444 additional arrests and known offenses relating to Islamist terrorism, which represents just 0.08 percent of the annual increase in police-reported crime in England and Wales in the 12 months between July 2016 and June 2017. Other categories of crime were responsible for much larger portions of that 13 percent overall rise in crime. For example, an increase in stalking and harassment represented the equivalent of 11.12 percent of the overall increase, a rise in thefts represented the equivalent of 31.8 percent of the overall increase, and a significant rise in rape offenses represented the equivalent of 1.42 percent of the overall increase – a proportion 19 times larger than that of Islamist terror-related arrests, homicides and attempted murder offenses. If we isolate “racially or religiously aggravated” offenses (that is, hate crimes) we see that there were 52,925 such offenses in the year leading up to June 2017, an increase of 10,577 (25 percent) from the figure for the previous year. This represents 1.8 percent of the overall rise in crime, and is 24 times greater than the increase in “international terrorism” arrests and known criminal offenses relating to the three terrorist attacks in London and Manchester. There were 36,607 more shoplifting offenses recorded between July 2016 and June 2017, than in the year before that – meaning shoplifting contributed 82 times more greatly to the overall increase in crime than arrests, homicides and attempted murder offenses relating to “radical Islamist terror” did. Unknown Islamist Terror Offenses However, we have to look beyond the 329 known homicides and attempted murder offenses, and the estimated 115 additional terror-related arrests. Remember, these crime statistics also include reported and recorded offenses that don’t culminate in arrests. The Crime Statistics division of the U.K. Office of National Statistics told us that other terrorism-related offenses could be included elsewhere in the recorded crime statistics, namely in a sub-category called “Other offenses against the state and public order.” This sub-category contains specific offenses such as “Engaging in conduct, or assisting another, in preparation of committing an act of terrorism,” “failure to disclose information about acts of terrorism,” and “distribute/circulate a terrorist publication,” along with many other non-terrorism-related offenses. Unfortunately, there is no breakdown available of the number of each offense within this sub-category, so we don’t know exactly how many terrorist-related offenses there were in the last 12 months, nor how many there were in the 12 months before that. (Nor is there a breakdown of which kind of terrorism these offenses relate to – international terrorism, Northern Ireland, and so on.) However, we do know that there were 50,976 recorded offenses in the sub-category of “Other offenses against the state and public order” and that this represents an increase of 10,110 (or 25 percent) over the previous year. So from a statistical and logical point of view, the absolute maximum possible increase in Islamist terror-related offenses in the past year is 10,439 (the 329 known homicides and attempted murder offenses from the London and Manchester attacks, added to the 10,110 increase under “other offenses against the state and public order.”) This figure represents 1.79 percent of the overall increase of 583,782 in total crimes recorded, but even at that, it is almost certainly a significant over-estimation (because not all crimes under “other offenses against the state and public order” would have been terrorism-related, and not all of those would have been related to Islamist terror.) Compare this to the fact that theft offenses, for example, increased by 185,865 – representing 31.8 percent of the overall increase in crime, or that there was an increase of 88,822 in “violence without injury” offenses (kidnapping, child abduction, assault without injury), representing 15.2 percent of the overall increase. Stalking and harassment (up 64,924 from the previous year) represented 11.1 percent of the overall rise in crime, and the additional 40,273 domestic burglary offenses in the year ending in June 2017 represented 6.9 percent of the overall increase. There are many other offenses and sub-categories of offense whose contribution to the overall 13 percent increase in crime was greater than the maximum possible contribution made by Islamist terror-related offenses. They can all be found in Table 4 of an official Office of National Statistics spreadsheet, which you can download here. This should clearly demonstrate that Donald Trump’s highlighting of “radical Islamic terror” as being linked to a 13 percent increase in crime is grossly misleading. From a factual and statistical point of view, he would have accurately reflected the actual data if his tweet had read: < Just out report: “England and Wales crime rises 13% annually amid spread of theft, violence without injury, stalking and harassment and domestic burglary.” > The Crime Survey of England and Wales, which is separate to the police statistics we’ve been analyzing (and to which Trump was alluding), found a nine percent overall drop in crime in the year leading up to June 2017. The CSEW is a survey given to residents in England and Wales which asks them about their experience of crime and policing in the preceding 12 months. The statistics gathered from this survey are therefore not limited to crimes that are actually reported to police in England and Wales. It is conducted and published on a quarterly basis (four times a year.)

Flatley, John. “Statistical bulletin – Crime in England and Wales: Year Ending June 2017.”  Office of National Statistics (U.K.) 19 October 2017.;Office of National Statistics (U.K.) “Crime in England and Wales: Appendix Tables. Year Ending June 2017. Table A4.”   Office of National Statistics (U.K.) 19 October 2017.;Allen, Grahame; Dempsey, Noel. “Terrorism in Great Britain: the Statistics.”  House of Commons Library. 6 October 2017.;National Counter Terrorism Police Operations Centre (U.K.) “Table A.13 Categorisation of Persons Arrested, Charged and Convicted After a Charge for Terrorism-Related Offences” in “Operation of Police Powers Under the Terrorism Act 2000 and Subsequent Legislation.”  U.K. Home Office. June 2017;Media Matters for America. “Trump Tweet About UK Crime and Muslims Mirrors Segment from Conspiracy-Mongering Network OANN.”  Media Matters for America. 20 October 2017.;White, Nicola. “Migration Statistics Quarterly Report August 2017. Table 2: Latest Changes in Net Migration by Citizenship.”  Office of National Statistics (U.K.) 24 August 2017.

kaepernick-anthemk-stand-if-signed

kaepernick-anthemk-stand-if-signed

In October 2017, Colin Kaepernick told a CBS reporter he would stand for the national atnthem if he were signed by an NFL team.

In October 2017, a rumor spread that former San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick — who National Football League teams have refused to sign since his 2016 silent protest during the national anthem — had said he would be willing to stand during the national anthem if he was signed by a team. Kaepernick was the first NFL player to sit, and then kneel, during the anthem, in protest against police brutality and racial injustice.  The Daily Wire web site wrote: < According to a breaking news report from the Associated Press, former San Francisco 49ers second string quarterback Colin Kaepernick now says that he’ll stand during the national anthem if an NFL team suddenly decides to give him a job: > < BREAKING: Quarterback Colin Kaepernick tells CBS he’ll stand during national anthem if given chance to play football in NFL again. — The Associated Press (@AP) October 8, 2017 > < According to CBS News, which sat down with the out-of-work NFLer for “several hours,” Kaepernick is actively looking for work, and is willing to abdicate his year-long national anthem protest, if only an NFL team would deign to allow him to warm their bench. > The sports web site Bleacher Report similarly reported: < Free-agent quarterback Colin Kaepernick, who remains unsigned after sitting or kneeling during the national anthem throughout the 2016 season, said he plans to stand if signed by an NFL team. Jason La Canfora of CBS Sports revealed Kaepernick’s intentions Sunday. > These reports (and others) were ultimately based on claims made by CBS reporter Jason La Canfora, who has since resiled from these claims. The Daily Wire’s story has been updated to reflect that, and the Associated Press has deleted its tweet. However, as of press time, the Daily Wire’s article retained its original, inaccurate headline “QB Colin Kaepernick Now Says He’ll Stand for the National Anthem If He’s Signed to a Team.” As of press time, the Bleacher Report has not yet updated its story. On 7 October 2017, CBS reporter Jason La Canfora appeared on the show NFL Today and summarized a conversation he had had with Kaepernick. During that segment, La Canfora described the player’s determination to return to an NFL team, and claimed: < He’s not planning on kneeling, he’s going to donate all his jersey sales, and he’s planning on standing for the anthem, if given the opportunity. > However, a day later Colin Kaepernick appeared to allude to the inaccuracy of that account, in this tweet: < A lie gets halfway around the world before the truth has a chance to get its pants on. Winston S. Churchill — Colin Kaepernick (@Kaepernick7) October 8, 2017 > Kaepernick’s girlfriend, radio presenter Nessa Diab, directly refuted La Canfora’s claims: < The reports that Colin will stand for the anthem are completely false! He has never discussed this with anyone. pic.twitter.com/tWusUBJMeF — NESSA (@nessnitty) October 8, 2017 > NFL Today deleted a video of La Canfora’s claims from its Twitter account, and La Canfora himself posted a series of tweets clarifying that he had not, in fact, discussed the possibility of standing for the national anthem in his conversation with Kaepernick. < Wanted to clarify one thing regarding @Kaepernick7. When I was asked about his whether or not he would sit or stand for anthem … — Jason La Canfora (@JasonLaCanfora) October 8, 2017 > < Standing for Anthem wasn’t something that I spoke to Colin about sat. I relayed what had been reported about him standing in the future… — Jason La Canfora (@JasonLaCanfora) October 8, 2017 > < Reports about @Kaepernick7 standing for anthem had not been refuted. However, I cant say if they are true or not. Colin and I didn’t discuss — Jason La Canfora (@JasonLaCanfora) October 8, 2017 > < Colin would have to address any future demonstrations. I didn’t ask him if he would sit or stand. Our chat primarily about his will to play — Jason La Canfora (@JasonLaCanfora) October 8, 2017 > < I know @Kaepernick7 is fully committed to playing football and helping those in need. What he would do during the Anthem I do not know — Jason La Canfora (@JasonLaCanfora) October 8, 2017 > It was not the first time that a news organization reported Kaepernick’s purported willingness to stand during the anthem. In March 2017, Adam Schefter wrote an article headlined “Colin Kaepernick to stand during national anthem next season,” in which he cited anonymous sources: < Quarterback Colin Kaepernick will stand during the national anthem next season, sources told ESPN on Thursday. Kaepernick no longer wants his method of protest to detract from the positive change he believes has been created, sources told ESPN. He also said the amount of national discussion on social inequality — as well as support from other athletes nationwide, including NFL and NBA players — affirmed the message he was trying to deliver. > Schefter did not quote Kaepernick himself in the article or offer verifiable proof. We could not find any evidence to corroborate Schefter’s claim.Â

"robert" AND "e" AND "lee" AND "confederate" AND "monuments"

robert-e-lee-confederate-monuments

robert-e-lee-confederate-monuments

Between the end of the Civil War and his death, former Confederate General Robert E. Lee expressed opposition to the building of Confederate monuments.

A century-and-a-half-old debate over the propriety of erecting statues and monuments to the Confederacy in the post-Civil War era came back with full force in August 2017 when a white nationalist rally protesting the planned removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee in Charlottesville, Virginia, turned violent, culminating in a vehicular attack that killed one person and injured 19. The incident sparked an accelerated effort by states and municipalities in various parts of the country to remove such monuments, of which there are approximately 750 spread across the U.S., according to the Southern Poverty Law Center (SPLC). Proponents of their removal say the continued presence of the monuments confers undue dignity on a faction that fought to preserve the institution of slavery and the ethos of white supremacy that underlays it. Those who defend the markers, on the other hand — among the most prominent of whom is President Donald Trump — say they deserve to stand as reminders of America’s past: < Sad to see the history and culture of our great country being ripped apart with the removal of our beautiful statues and monuments. You….. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 17, 2017 > < …can’t change history, but you can learn from it. Robert E Lee, Stonewall Jackson – who’s next, Washington, Jefferson? So foolish! Also… — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 17, 2017 > < …the beauty that is being taken out of our cities, towns and parks will be greatly missed and never able to be comparably replaced! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 17, 2017 > A majority of Americans side with the president, an August 2017 PBS NewsHour/NPR/Marist poll found, with 62 percent of respondents agreeing that such monuments ought to remain in place as “historical symbols.” One of the most frequently cited voices in opposition to Confederate monuments, ironically, is that of the white, slave-owning Confederate General Robert E. Lee: < So about that Robert E Lee statue… here’s what the man himself said about Civil War monuments: pic.twitter.com/9pZTYiDddX — Maddox (@maddoxrules) August 16, 2017 > < Even Robert E. Lee opposed monuments to Robert E. Lee https://t.co/hnnist1GYO pic.twitter.com/Pz4cIsNMcj — Alexander Clarkson (@APHClarkson) August 17, 2017 > That Lee expressed such views, and did so more than once between the end of the Civil War and his death in 1870 is confirmed by historian and biographer Jonathan Horn, who wrote in 2016: < In April 1865, after four years of civil war, Lee surrendered the Confederate Army of Northern Virginia and soon afterward accepted the presidency of Washington College in Lexington, Virginia. Letters seeking support for memorial projects received reluctant responses from the general-turned-educator, according to documents at the University of Virginia and the Library of Congress. Lee worried that building memorials so soon after the war would anger the victorious Federals. “As regards the erection of such a monument as is contemplated, my conviction is, that however grateful it would be to the feelings of the South, the attempt in the present condition of the country would have the effect of retarding, instead of accelerating its accomplishment, and of continuing, if not adding to, the difficulties under which the Southern people labour,” he wrote. In June 1866, Lee criticized a plan to build a monument to Gen. Thomas “Stonewall” Jackson, whose fatal wounding at Chancellorsville three years prior had deprived the Army of Northern Virginia of its best corps commander. How could Lee ask war-ravaged families to contribute money for memorials when they lacked funds for food? “I do not think it feasible at this time,” he wrote. > It’s not strictly accurate to say that Lee’s objections to memorializing the Civil War applied only to Confederate monuments, however. A letter he wrote to David McConaughy of the Gettysburg Battlefield Memorial Association in 1869, in which he turned down an invitation to participate in their preservation efforts, made clear his conviction that it was more important for the nation to heal than to perpetuate the memory of the “civil strife” it had so recently undergone. The letter was quoted in a 21 November 1957 article in the Chicago Tribune: < “My engagements will not permit me to be present, and I believe if there I could not add anything material to the information existing on the subject,” Lee wrote to David McConaughy. “I think it well, moreover, not to keep open the sores of war, but to follow the examples of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife and to commit to oblivion the feelings it engendered.” > Horn quotes this passage as well, saying of Lee < Rather than raising battlefield memorials, he favored erasing battlefields from the landscape altogether…. Lee feared that these reminders of the past would preserve fierce passions for the future. Such emotions threatened his vision for speedy reconciliation. As he saw it, bridging a divided country justified abridging history in places. > Lee’s zeal for North-South reconciliation verged on the evangelical, judging from some of his postwar statements. Another of his biographers, Charles Bracelen Flood, recounted an anecdote that speaks to Lee’s conviction that the formerly warring factions — particularly the side that lost, his side, the South — needed to forgive and forget and get on with the business of being Americans: < Lee knew that the war was over and that everything depended on a new attitude for a new day. He was taken to call on a lady who lived north of Lexington, and she promptly showed him the remains of a tree in her yard. All its limbs had been shot off by Federal artillery fire during Hunter’s raid, and its trunk torn by cannonballs. The woman looked at him expectantly as she showed him this memento of what she and her property had endured. Here was a man who would sympathize. Lee finally spoke. “Cut it down, my dear Madam, and forget it.” > Little could he have imagined that we would still be debating the issue some 150 years hence.

Desjardins, Lisa.   “Robert E. Lee Opposed Confederate Monuments.”    PBS NewsHour.   15 August 2017.;Dubenko, Anna.   “Right and Left on Removal of Confederate Statues.”    The New York Times.   18 August 2017.;Fellman, Michael.   The Making of Robert E. Lee.    Baltimore: Johns Hopkins University Press, 2003.   ISBN 9780801874116, p. 299.;Fisher, John.   “Letter Bares Lee Opposition to memorial.”    Chicago Daily Tribune.   21 November 1957.;Flood, Charles Bracelen.   Lee: The Last Years.    Boston: Houghton Mifflin Harcourt, 1998.   ISBN 9780395929742, p. 136.;Fortin, Jacey.   “The Statue at the Center of Charlottesville’s Storm.    The New York Times.   13 August 2017.;Helm, Joe.   “Charlottesville Prepares for a White Nationalist Rally on Saturday.”    The Washington Post.   10 August 2017.;Horn, Jonathan.   “What Robert E. Lee Can Teach Us About Confederate Memorials.”    CNN.   11 June 2016.;Morris, Tim.   “Trump Aligned with Most Americans on Confederate Monuments: Opinion.”    The Times Picayune.   18 August 2017.;Somin, Ilya.   “Why Slippery Slope Arguments Should Not Stop Us From Removing Confederate Monuments.”    The Washington Post.   15 August 2017.;Stanglin, Doug and Cavallaro, Gabe.   “1 Dead, 19 Injured as Car Hits Crowd AFter a ‘Unite the Right’ Rally in Charlottesville; Driver in Custody.”    USA Today.   12 August 2017.

barack-obama-katrina

barack-obama-katrina

Barack Obama was president when Hurricane Katrina hit New Orleans in 2005.

As damage from Hurricane Harvey continued to grow in Texas in late August 2017, some Twitter users sought to defend President Donald Trump’s response to the disaster by criticizing the actions of his predecessor, Barack Obama during similarly pervasive flooding in Louisiana in 2016. Other users took that argument even further, knocking Obama for not “doing enough” to help Louisiana during Hurricane Katrina. The argument that Obama did not do enough after Hurricane Katrina lashed New Orleans, however, ignores the fact that Obama was not president at the time. Katrina made landfall in August 2005, during George W. Bush’s presidency.   Obama — who was a Democratic Party senator representing Illinois when the storm hit — was not elected president until November 2008. However, Obama did meet with Katrina evacuees on 5 September 2005 in Houston, Texas alongside former Presidents Bill Clinton and George H.W. Bush: Online speculation also mounted around some users posting anti-Obama tweets, questioning whether they were actually Russian misinformation “bots”: One of the suspected bots, @DaNolans, denied being an illegitimate account in a post on 29 August 2017: < I was taking the piss outta Trump with this folks. Check TL. Never woulda thought people truly believe such nonsense. Scary times #notabot > Ben Nimmo, a senior fellow for information defense for the Atlantic Council’s Digital Forensic Research Lab who has written about “bot” attacks, told us that he scanned mentions of Obama and Katrina between 24 August 2017 and 30 August 2017. He said: < The majority of tweets, and the most popular tweets, all mocked the idea of blaming the Katrina reaction on Obama. The anti-Obama messaging does not appear to have penetrated. Of the accounts in the image, one is now suspended and the others show varying degrees of activity; one claims to have been joking. There doesn’t appear to be major bot (i.e. automated) traffic involved. > While it is unclear how many of the recent spate of anti-Obama tweets were manufactured or made in jest, an August 2013 survey conducted by the Democrat-oriented Public Policy Polling showed that 29 percent of Louisiana Republicans believed that Obama was to blame for the oft-critized federal response to Katrina. Another 44 percent were reportedly unsure whether Obama or George W. Bush was at fault, while 28 percent blamed Bush. That mindset was brought to national television in a September 2016 segment on Comedy Central’s Daily Show, which featured a Trump supporter who said he believed that Obama “had a big part” in the 9/11 attacks because he was “never in the office” at the time. When asked why Obama would not have been in the Oval Office during the 11 September 2001 attacks (which occurred more than seven years before he was elected president), the man said: < That I don’t know. I’d like to get to the bottom of that. >

Kludt, Tom. “Poll: Louisiana GOPers Unsure If Katrina Response Was Obama’s Fault.” Talking Points Memo. 21 August 2013.;Associated Press. “Former Presidents Again Join Forces To Help Victims of Disaster.” Accessed via lubbockonline.com. 6 September 2005.;“Jordan Klepper Fingers the Pulse – Conspiracy Theories Thrive at a Trump Rally: The Daily Show.” YouTube, uploaded by The Daily Show with Trevor Noah. 21 September 2016. https://youtu.be/eFQhw3VVToQ;Alpert, Bruce. “George W. Bush Never Recovered Politically From Katrina.” New Orleans Times-Picayune. 28 August 2015.;Barojan, Donara and Nimmo, Ben. “Kremlin and Alt-Right Share “Nazi” Narrative.” Medium. 18 August 2017.;Gonzales, Carolina. “10 Years Ago: Politicians United for Hurricane Katrina Victims.” Houston Chronicle, 4 September 2015.

harvey-texas-insurance

harvey-texas-insurance

On 1 September 2017, a new law will come into force in Texas, making it harder for consumers to get paid for property insurance claims related to weather.

On 27 August 2017, as the full damage to Texas from a storm of historic proportions was not yet fully known, a number of social media posts began to spread, alerting readers to a change in Texas law around insurance claims in the event of weather damage. One Facebook user posted the following: < EFFECTIVE FRIDAY, the laws governing insurance claims in Texas will change to your detriment. To take advantage of current law, YOU MUST FILE YOUR CLAIM, IN WRITING, BY THURSDAY, AUGUST 31, regardless of whether your damage occurred before that date. That is, it does not matter if your DAMAGE occurred before the effective date. To take advantage of current law you must actually file a claim by Thursday. It must be (1) IN WRITING, and (2) SPECIFIC ABOUT WHAT DAMAGE YOU ARE CLAIMING OCCURRED. The changes were made by H.B. 1774. The provisions in that bill hamper your ability to challenge your insurance company if they slow pay, low pay, or deny your claim. (Among other things, It lessens the penalties for their failure to pay your claims or their slow-paying them, and it limits your ability to collect attorneys fees, so you’d have to pay to sue out of your own pocket.) Again, this law makes it harder for you to get the insurance companies to pay what they are supposed to pay when they are supposed to pay it. > Former Texas state representative Glen Maxey wrote: < In the 2017 Legislative Session, a majority of your state lawmakers changed the laws which help property owners recover losses after a storm like Harvey and hampered your ability to hold your insurance company accountable if they slow pay, low pay, or no pay. Well, the new law goes into effect SEPTEMBER 1!! This law will make it harder for you to get the insurance companies to pay what they are supposed to pay when they are supposed to pay it. > And on 29 August, Rep. Joaquín Castro encouraged Texans affected by Tropical Storm Harvey to file their claims before 1 September: < Texans: be sure to file for #Harvey relief before Sept 1. #TXlege passed a bill making it harder to dispute weather-related property claims. — Joaquin Castro (@JoaquinCastrotx) August 28, 2017 > Texas House Bill 1774 does indeed introduce changes to the way property damage insurance claims are dealt with in the state, but only in the event of a litigated dispute over a claim. Most insurance claims are settled out of court, and so the potential benefit in filing a claim before 1 September 2017 (which is itself marginal) will likely not apply in most cases. The real benefit would be in filing a lawsuit before 1 September, but for obvious practical reasons, it is extremely unlikely that someone whose home has been destroyed or extensively damaged days earlier, would be in a position to do this. The law was signed by Governor Greg Abbott on 26 May 2017. What the law changes The first major provision in the law is that an individual or business filing a lawsuit in relation to a weather-related property damage insurance claim (including flood damage) will have to give their insurance company 61 days’ notice before initiating litigation. According to an analysis published by the independent House Research Organization in the Texas House of Representatives: < [The law] would require an insured [person] making a claim against an insurer or agent relating to damage to real property caused by an earthquake, earth tremor, wildfire, flood, tornado, lightning, hurricane, hail, wind, snowstorm, or rainstorm to provide written notice to the insurer at least 61 days before filing the claim. This pre-suit notice would have to provide a statement of the acts giving rise to the claim, the specific amount alleged to be owed, and amount of reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees already incurred by the claimant. This notice would be admissible as evidence in a civil action or alternative dispute resolution. > The second major provision in HB 1774 is that it imposes a claim recovery threshold in order for individuals to recover the full amount of their attorney’s fees, if they decide to go to court. If, in the event of a lawsuit, a jury decides to award a plaintiff 80 percent or more of the amount they are claiming, then all that individual’s attorney’s fees will be covered. If a jury decides to award 20 percent or less, none of their attorney’s fees are covered: < The bill would require the court to award the full amount of reasonable and necessary attorney’s fees if the amount to be awarded in the judgment divided by the amount alleged to be owed was at least 0.8, not limited by statute, and recoverable. The court would be prohibited from awarding attorney’s fees if this fraction was less than 0.2, or if the claimant failed to provide pre-suit notice. > We consulted two experts on insurance: Etti Baranoff, an associate professor of finance at Virginia Commonwealth University and a former regulator at the Texas Department of Insurance, and Dalit Baranoff, a historian of insurance policy who runs the Risks and Consequences blog. They told us the bill is designed to discourage consumers from taking a claim to court and filing exaggerated claims, but otherwise doesn’t change the process of settling claims out of court. < HB 1774 should not have any effect on homeowners’ ability to recover claims from insurers. The law has nothing to do with payment of insurance claims. It only applies if a lawsuit is involved. The vast majority of insurance claims will be settled without any dispute. Where it does come into play, is if a policyholder disagrees with an insurance settlement, in which case litigation is still an option. > This is where the 61-day waiting period comes into play, which the Baranoffs say is “meant to encourage mediation and out-of-court settlement”, and the 80/20 rule in the new law will make it harder for people to recoup their legal costs if they decide to sue. The reasoning behind this, according to the Baranoffs, is to discourage inflated or exaggerated claims, since claimants will be less likely to be awarded 80 percent or more of a relatively large claim and are therefore more likely to have to pay some attorney’s fees if they do. Indeed, the stated purpose of HB 1774 was to stop a historic increase in the number of hailstorm-related property damage insurance claims, something the bill’s sponsor State Representative Greg Bonnen called “the worst lawsuit abuse we have in the state” (Relevant portion begins at 3:50). Tanya Pierce, Associate Professor of Law at Texas A&M University, previously practiced in the area of complex litigation and insurance coverage. She told us there is only one potential benefit to homeowners in filing a written claim before 1 September 2017: < [Filing a written claim with the insurance company before 1 September] protects them from a small provision of the act that limits the insurance company’s liability on the interest that they would have had to pay as additional damages. > Again, however, this benefit only accrues if the homeowner later decides to sue the insurance company. Under current law, Pierce says, an insurance company would have to pay 18 percent interest on whatever they owed in the event that a consumer successfully sues them for a delayed payment. Under the new law, she points out, companies would have to pay a lower rate of interest arrived at by adding 5 percent to the interest rate determined under Sec. 304.003, Financial Code (Sec. 2c). So there is a potential benefit in filing a claim before 1 September 2017, but only if you then later file a successful lawsuit in the event of a dispute over your payment. Conclusion The new law will not have a direct effect on insurance claims that are settled out of court, and most insurance claims are settled out of court. However, the law could make it slower and more difficult for homeowners to get paid what they believe they are owed if they start litigation after 1 September 2017. It will also make suing insurance companies more financially risky. If a consumer were to file a lawsuit against their insurance company before 1 September, they could experience a significant benefit from having done so. However, if their home has been extensively damaged just before 1 September 2017 (by historically catastrophic flooding, for example), it is extremely unlikely they would be able, practically speaking, to find and hire an attorney and file a suit before 1 September. They would also have to have a reasonable basis to sue — a dispute over their claim, or an insurance company’s refusal to pay, for example — a process that there simply wasn’t time for between the arrival of Tropical Storm Harvey on 26 August and the enactment of the new law on 1 September. The only potential benefit from filing a claim before 1 September is that if someone later decides to sue the insurance company and wins, the company will be obliged to pay them the higher, pre-September rate of interest on what they owe. The claims contained in viral Facebook posts on 27 August 2017 are a largely accurate description of the provisions of HB 1774, but they do lack important context and do not make it clear to readers that the law only affects how claims are dealt with in the event that someone decides to sue an insurance company. These posts do not include that most insurance claims are settled out of court, and will therefore not be directly affected by the change in the law.Â

Bonnen, Rep. Greg.  “H.B. 1774.”  Texas House of Representatives.  26 May 2017;House Research Organization.  “Bill Analysis – H.B. 1774.”   Texas House of Representatives.  4 May 2017;Texas Department of Insurance.  “Interim Charges: the Cost of Weather-Related Property Claims and Related Litigation.”  Texas Department of Insurance.  1 February 2017.

no-child-support-2017

no-child-support-2017

President Trump and Congress abolished child support as of 2018.

In September 2017 two headlines created using the prank generator React365 suggested that President Trump and Congress had effectively ended all child support payments as of 2018, blaring “No more child support after 2017!” and “CHILD SUPPORT SAID TO END BY BEGINNING OF 2018”: The word salad “news” content originated with React365, a prank generator whose sole purpose is to enable users to generate fake news and share it on social media: On the footer of each page, a poorly-worded disclaimer explains that its headlines are “created by users” and are not a “source of information”: Fake news about child support typically spreads with alacrity. However, there have been no legitimate news reports of either the President or Congress ending (or even intending to end) child support. It is simply false information generated by a prank web site.

"steven" AND "furtick" AND "signs" AND "six" AND "year" AND "110" AND "million" AND "contract" AND "lakewood" AND "church"
"lakewood" AND "furtick"

steven-furtick-signs-six-year-110-million-contract-lakewood-church

steven-furtick-signs-six-year-110-million-contract-lakewood-church

Elevation Church Pastor Steven Furtick confirmed he signed a large "deal" to preach at Lakewood Church alongside Joel Osteen.

On 28 July 2017, the Christian satire web site Babylon Bee published an article appearing to claim that Elevation Church Pastor Steven Furtnick made a professional athletics-style deal to move to Lakewood Church alongside Joel Osteen: < CHARLOTTE, NC—In a stunning move that is making waves throughout evangelicalism, Pastor Steven Furtick has announced he has come to an agreement with Lakewood Church to preach alongside Joel Osteen, forming the core of a “superstar preaching team.” The contract is worth $110 million over the next six years, Lakewood confirmed, making it the largest the preaching world has ever seen. Donning a Lakewood Church hat and suit, an emotional Furtick broke the news in a two-hour televised special on TBN Thursday night, dubbed “The Decision.” “I’m going to take my talents to Houston and join Joel’s legendary squad,” Furtick said as hundreds of cameras flashed around Elevation Church’s press conference room. “I wish Elevation the best of luck in the seasons to come, and hope they can find someone as ripped and godly as me.” > The Babylon Bee is a satire site whose humor is intended for Christian readers with a footer that clearly reads: < The Babylon Bee is Your Trusted Source For Christian News Satire. > However, the claim’s spread led Furtick to publish a video to Twitter explaining the joke: < CONSIDER THE SOURCE pic.twitter.com/Jtuv8QoX8u — Steven Furtick (@stevenfurtick) July 30, 2017 > Although the Babylon Bee is open about its satirical nature, some jokes about nuanced aspects of Christian culture go over readers’ heads. Articles suggesting incarcerated abortion provider Kermit Gosnell was a Democratic National Convention speaker, that Elevation Church acquired a baptismal waterslide, and Californians were required by law to register Bibles as assault weapons all caused confusion among social media users.

panda-solar-farm-china

panda-solar-farm-china

A photograph shows a panda-shaped solar farm in China.

On 29 June 2017, Panda Green Energy Group Limited announced that its first panda bear-shaped solar power facility was officially connected to the grid in Datong Shanxi: < The world’s leading eco-development solutions provider, Panda Green Energy Group Limited (00686.HK, “Panda Green Energy”, formerly known as “United Photovoltaics Group Limited”) is pleased to announce that the world’s first Panda Power Plant in Datong Shanxi was officially connected to the grid. > Several web sites started to aggregate this news; many included an image that was purportedly a photograph of the “solar farm”.  Some outlets, such as the Telegraph, mentioned — correctly — that the image is an artist’s rendering, but many others outlets shared it as a photograph with no caption: This is not a photograph, but an artist’s rendering that has been around since at least June 2016, months before construction even started on this plant in November of the same year. Although we have not identified the specific artist who created this concept, it was created in conjunction with a United Nations Development Program project promote sustainability: < The Panda Solar Stations base their appearance on China’s national treasure – the Giant Panda. The 50 MW power plants cover a total area of 248 acres, with the black part composed of monocrystalline silicone and the grey and white part thin film solar cells. As the future of development, the youth have the opportunity to contribute to world-wide sustainable development. UNDP and China Merchants New Energy will work together to promote and popularize the promotion of new energy through summer camps and open innovation design contests. The initiatives aims to engage the youth of China and assist in developing the future leaders in the green energy field. […] UNDP tackles the toughest development challenges in the world and are committed to finding the best-fit solutions to those challenges. Innovation has been a key priority of UNDP with ‘open challenges’ providing a platform to encourage innovation. UNDP will organise an ‘open design challenge’ for creative and aspiring youth in China. Using renewable energy as the foundation and utilizing the expertise from China Merchants New Energy, the ‘open challenge’ will provide an unique environment encouraging co-creation which blends design, prototyping, and open-processes, aiming to support the achievement of SDGs in China with practical solutions to the growing need for affordable and clean energy whilst engaging the youth with sustainable development. > A similar design sketch showing a conceptual rendering of a panda solar plant in Fiji was also released by the Panda Green company: A spokesperson for UNDP China confirmed that the viral image was an artist’s rendering and sent us an image captured by a drone showing the real solar panda farm:  Â

United Nations Development Program.  “Construction of first Panda Solar Station Commences.”   20 November 2016.;Panda Green Energy Group Unlimited.  “The Prime Minister of Fiji Expecting Panda Power Plant to Land in Fiji soon.”   17 May 2017.;Malloy, Mark.  “Panda power! China is Building the World’s Cutest Solar Station.”   Telegraph.  6 July 2017.;Panda Green Energy Group Unlimited.  “The World’s First Panda Power Plant Officially Connected to Grid.”   29 June 2017.

Bethania Palma

A dangerous new drug known as "gray death" can kill through the air and skin contact.

On 11 May 2017, TheFederalistPapers.org, a web site that often posts conservative click bait, reported on a new drug cocktail known as “Gray Death”: < The Indiana Department of Homeland Security is warning about the new drug called “Gray Death” that doesn’t just kill the drug users with even the slightest contact – but the first responders who come to help as well. It is a “particularly dangerous mixture of heroin, fentanyl, carfentanil and other synthetic opioids,” WDRB reports, that is usually used as a tranquilizer for elephants and other large mammals. It is “10,000 times more potent than morphine and 100 times more potent than fentanyl” and poses a severe threat to first responders because it can be absorbed through the skin or accidentally inhaled through the air. > The sensational sounding nature of the story prompted questions whether it is true, but the story is accurate (and largely cribbed from the reporting of local television station WDRB). We followed up with the Indiana Department of Homeland Security to confirm details of the report, and spokesman John Erickson confirmed to us that “very casual contact” with the substance can potentially cause a serious adverse reaction. As far as inhalation, he compared it to closing a bag of flour: some powder will become airborne. But unlike flour, a similar accidental exposure to Gray Death can lead to serious health problems. Authorities are notifying first responders to take necessary precautions. Indiana DHS released a press statement that warns: < Gray Death, a particularly dangerous mixture of heroin, fentanyl, carfentanil and other synthetic opioids, made its way to Indiana this week, causing an overdose in central Indiana. Partners warning about the increased risk are State of Indiana Emergency Medical Services and the State Fire Marshal, part of the Indiana Department of Homeland Security; Indiana State Department of Health and the Indiana State Police. A persistent increase in opioid overdoses tied to the synthetic drug carfentanil have been seen around the country, prompting concern. … Carfentanil, which is used as a tranquilizing agent for elephants and other large mammals, is 10,000 times more potent than morphine and 100 times more potent than fentanyl. It is often mixed in with other drugs such as cocaine or crystal meth — and often drug users have no idea their drugs have been tainted. Carfentanil and other fentanyl-related compounds are a serious danger to public safety, first responder, medical, treatment, and laboratory personnel. These substances can come in several forms, including powder, blotter paper, tablets, and spray. The substance can be absorbed through the skin or accidental inhalation of airborne powder. “With the pervasive nature of opioids and addiction, there is always the chance that family or friends may come into contact with dangerous substances when working to save their loved one,” said Dr. Michael Olinger, State Emergency Medical Services Medical Director. > The release included an image demonstrating how deadly carfentanil is compared to other dangerous substances. It shows how much heroin can kill an average adult versus fentanyl and carfentanil:  In February 2016, a 24-year-old Georgia woman died after overdosing on the drug mixture: < A Brookhaven woman died from a mixture of heroin and fentanyl known as ‘gray death,’ GBI officials said. Lauren Camp, 24, had ingested the mix before she was found submerged in a bathtub in February, GBI spokeswoman Nelly Miles said. GBI officials found the deadly drugs at the scene. Camp’s “gray death” is the first confirmed in Georgia. > The drug has been spreading from state to state and apparently can vary in its constitution. But what sets it apart is its gray color — and its deadliness: < Over the past four months, Georgia police have seized about 50 batches of grey death statewide, with metro Atlanta being a major hotspot. The drug has also started popping up in Alabama, Ohio and Pennsylvania, state and local officials confirmed. Because ingredients change from sample to sample, each batch of grey death is a mystery — right down to its signature color. “To this date, I have no idea what makes it gray,” said Deneen Kilcrease, a forensic chemist with the Georgia Bureau of Investigation’s crime lab. “Nothing in and of itself should be that color.” >

Gehl, Robert. “New Drug ‘Gray Death’ Can Be Transmitted Through The AIR.”   FederalistPapers.com. 11 May 2017.;WDRB. “WARNING: Authorities Say ‘Gray Death’ Made Its Way to Indiana Earlier This Week.”   11 May 2017.;Habersham, Raisa. “‘Gray Death:’ Heroin, Fentanyl Mix Kills DeKalb Woman.”   Atlanta Journal-Constitution. 16 May 2017.;Nedelman, Michael. “‘Grey Death’: The Powerful Street Drug That’s Puzzling Authorities.”   CNN. 13 May 2017.

oakland-raiders-players-punish-derek-carr-standing-national-anthem

oakland-raiders-players-punish-derek-carr-standing-national-anthem

The Oakland Raiders' offensive line allowed quarterback Derek Carr to be sacked several times because he did not take part in a protest during the national anthem.

Two conservative radio hosts alleged on 28 September 2017 that members of the Oakland Raiders may purposefully put quarterback Derek Carr in harm’s way for not taking part in a protest carried out by several black players — a claim later picked up by several web sites. Hosts Jack Armstrong and Joe Getty claimed to have “insider information” concerning the performance of the Raiders’ offensive line — the only one in the National Football League comprised entirely of African-American players — in a 27-10 loss to Washington four days earlier. According to Armstrong and Getty, an “extremely reliable” source on the team divulged to them that the offensive linemen allowed Carr to be sacked (tackled before he could throw the ball) in retaliation for his refusal to join them in protesting during the playing of the national anthem before the game. Carr was sacked four times during the game, which Armstrong and Getty claim is outside the norm. Getty first claimed that Carr (who is white) was sacked once during the 2016 season before amending his argument: < So Derek Carr — who was never sacked last year — was sacked four times by the Redskins, back to back on the second offensive series of the Raiders. The first series he threw almost immediately an interception, so that series was over before it began. So for the first full series he was sacked twice, [on] back-to-back plays. Also, three times, the extremely dependable, never-does-this center (the guy who snaps the ball to the quarterback) snapped it before Carr was ready — three times. He “hiked” it, as the kids say, into Carr’s knees before he was supposed to. > In reality, Carr was sacked 16 times during the previous season — one of which resulted in a season-ending broken fibula. In 2015 he was sacked 31 times, and in 2014 it happened 24 times. Armstrong added: < I think you’re guessing where this is going. We have some insider information that this was not an accident. > The hosts stated several times that they did not know if the allegations of “Deep Route” (as they called their alleged source) were true. According to them, however, the source claimed to have heard an offensive line member say of Carr, “If he wants to stand alone for the national anthem, he can stand alone on the field.” Armstrong said: < If this story is true, you’ve got an animosity between a white quarterback and a black offensive line that you can’t fix very easily. And the league is just gonna break down completely along racial lines. > Getty added: < A reporter got wind of this — one reporter, and asked a team official about this and was told, “If you report on this you will be blackballed. You will get no access to the Oakland Raiders, period. Your career reporting on the Raiders will be done if you report on this. > However, the two hosts mentioned several times that the allegation had not been verified. Willard Ogan, the assignment manager for Comcast SportsNet Bay Area — one of several local news outlets that regularly covers the team — scoffed at the pair’s story. He told us: < Unless they would happen to want to name their source, I’m guessing they made this shit up on their way in. I’m at a loss for words. You’ve got to give me something more than this. > He added that there was a logical flaw in the argument that Carr’s offensive line willfully let him be sacked : < They’re trying to get to the Super Bowl. Why would they do this? He’s the franchise quarterback. > Regarding the allegation that a team official had threatened to cut off access to the team for an unnamed reporter, Ogan said that the Raiders have never threatened to “blackball” his station: < Even when the Raiders were [playing] bad[ly], they never threatened to blackball any reporters. They may make it hard like any sports team when you’re writing stuff they don’t like to make it hard to get interviews. Put it like this: they’re no different than the Yankees would be on stuff like this. > Most of the team, including the offensive line (but not Carr), took part in a protest before the game, an offshoot of former San Francisco quarterback Colin Kaepernick’s decision to kneel during the anthem prior to games during the 2016 season to protest extrajudicial killings carried out by police against communities of color. U.S. Army veteran Nate Boyer has confirmed that he helped Kaepernick decide to carry out his protest in that format, rather than sitting during the anthem. Raiders offensive tackle Donald Penn said that their demonstration was a direct response to President Donald Trump’s call in September 2017 for NFL owners to fire any player who took part. Penn said: < I wish I didn’t have to do anything like that. I’ve been standing all the time, but when you get called out personally by the President of the country you gotta do something. I ain’t wanna do that. I don’t think my teammates wanna do that. > He also said: < This had nothing to do with disrespecting the military or the flag. I have the utmost respect for them. Because you will not see me over there shooting no guns. So I have so much respect for them and what they do. It had nothing to do with that. I hope they understand that. This all had to do with President Trump’s comments. That’s the only reason we did that. > Penn’s linemate Marshall Newhouse, however, attributed the protest to a wider range of issues: < The injustice in the country just doesn’t sit well with us, regardless of what the President said before. This is kind of an ongoing problem and we’re making a statement about that. It might seem that way that it was kind of a reaction to the President, but this stuff’s been going on for a long time. > Tackle Kelechi Osemele also faced accusations on his Instagram page that he and his linemates allowed Carr to be sacked. He responded: < If you guys really believe that…I don’t even know what to tell you. Carr is our brother he fully supported our decision to make this statement we discussed this as a TEAM and we all have each other’s back > When asked whether the protest had an impact on the Raiders’ performance, Carr said: < I really hope not, but you never know. You don’t know what’s going on in everybody’s head and all those things. But for me, it did not. > The offensive line did not repeat the protest during the team’s following game in Denver on 1 October 2017. Only one player on either squad — Oakland running back Marshawn Lynch — sat during the anthem, as he has done throughout the 2017 season. Carr suffered an injury after being sacked during the 1 October game. He was initially expected to miss between two and six weeks of action. But Ogan told us that he took part in the team’s regular practice on 5 October 2017. We contacted both the Raiders and the National Football League seeking comment on Armstrong and Getty’s allegations. We also contacted several other media outlets in the Bay Area about the duo’s allegation that the team threatened to “blackball” a local reporter. We had not received a response by press time.Â

Reid, Jason. “Oakland Raiders Offensive Line: the Silver and Blackest.” The Undefeated. 8 December 2016.;Schneidman, Matt. “Most Raiders Sit in Protest: ‘When You Get Called Out Personally … You Gotta Do Something.'” San Jose Mercury News. 24 September 2017.;Gutierrez, Paul. “Raiders’ Jack Del Rio Says NFL Protests Didn’t Affect Outcome of Game Against Redskins.” ESPN. 25 September 2017.;Chavez, Chris. “Raiders Staffers Cover Marshawn Lynch As He Sits During National Anthem.” Sports Illustrated. 1 October 2017.;Stiles, Adam. “Derek Carr has back injury, will miss 2-6 weeks.” SB Nation. 2 October 2017.;Sports Illustrated. “Raiders QB Derek Carr Expected to Miss Six to Eight Weeks After Surgery.” 24 December 2016.

"trump" AND "retweet" AND "cartoon" AND "train" AND "hitting" AND "cnn" AND "reporter"
"trump" AND "cartoon" AND "cnn"

trump-retweet-cartoon-train-hitting-cnn-reporter

trump-retweet-cartoon-train-hitting-cnn-reporter

President Trump retweeted a cartoon of a train hitting a CNN reporter.

On 15 August 2017, President Trump retweeted a cartoon depiction of a train running over a CNN reporter. He then quickly deleted the post, leaving some people skeptical that it had really happened. In addition to various credible news reports documenting the retweet, it was archived on Archive.is and the Internet Archive Wayback Machine. Here’s a screenshot of the tweet as it appeared on Trump’s timeline: Trump’s retweet came just three days after Heather Heyer was killed when a white supremacist plowed a car into a group of protesters at a rally in Charlottesville, Virginia. A day before the retweet, Trump had once again accused CNN of being “fake news” (which it is not). Although Trump certainly retweeted this image, the original poster, Twitter user @SLandinSoCal, quibbled with the media’s reporting, arguing that the train wasn’t actually “running over” the reporter: < MSM depicted my meme as showing the TrumpTrain “running over” a reporter.#FakeNews‼️ The reporter is trying to stop it- feet popping ties. pic.twitter.com/iiSPCzzWQI — SL (@SLandinSoCal) August 15, 2017 > The original comic was created by Cartoonist Gary Varvel and featured a Democrat Donkey attempting to stop the Trump Train. It was originally published by The Indy Star where it was shared with the following description: < Democrats are having a hard time stopping the momentum of the incoming Donald J. Trump’s administration. > Trump did not explain why he posted or subsequently deleted this image, but Politico reported that it wasn’t the only social media gaffe Trump made on the morning of 15 August 2017. The President also retweeted (and quickly deleted) a message calling him a fascist: < I’m announcing my retirement from Twitter. I’ll never top this RT. pic.twitter.com/HuGHkiPoyR — Mike Holden (@MikeHolden42) August 15, 2017 > Â

Stelter, Brian.  “President Trump Promised a ‘Big Press Conference.’ Here’s What Happened.   CNN.  14 August 2017.;Treene, Alayna.  “Trump Shares Meme of Train Running Over CNN.”   Axios.  15 August 2017.;Nelson, Louis.  “Trump Retweets Then Deletes Post Calling Him a Fascist.”   Politico.  15 August 2017.

warriors-white-house-visit

warriors-white-house-visit

The Golden State Warriors basketball team announced on 13 June 2017 that they had unanimously voted to skip a visit to the White House after winning the NBA Championship.

The morning after the Golden State Warriors basketball team defeated the Cleveland Cavaliers in the 2017 NBA Finals, the news was filled with reports about how the newly-crowned NBA champions had unanimously voted to skip the traditional congratulatory trip to the White House. Although this rumor was picked up by a diverse range of outlets, ranging from NBC to Uproxx to Vibe to Raw Story, these reports were all based on a single source: a tweet from CNBC finance reporter Josh Brown: < NBA champion Warriors skipping the White House visit, as a unanimous team decision per reports. — Downtown Josh Brown (@ReformedBroker) June 13, 2017 > Brown did not cite a source for the information, nor did he quote or link to any first-hand accounts of the team’s plans. Several Warriors members have talked about their dislike for the current administration, but that talk came before the team won the 2017 NBA championship. Head coach Steve Kerr, for instance, said that Donald Trump was “ill-suited to be President” in November 2016, while point guard Steph Curry slyly called the president an ass (saying, “I agree with that description … if you remove the ‘et’ from asset.”) Power forward David West was less coy regarding his opinion of President Trump and the president’s supporters: < “The things that he said, the things that he represented, that’s the way that the majority of this nation feels,” West said. “I think he just emboldened them because he’s able to say it publically. He got the platform.” “It is kind of unnerving and unsettling … The man’s 70 years old, so he is who he is. It’s just a shame that, throughout the process, a lot of these people were in hiding and waited for the cover of the ballot to represent who they are.” > So although it’s true that several members of the Golden State Warriors have openly expressed their dislike for President Trump, reports that the team has unanimously voted to skip the traditional visit to the White House is based on of a single unconfirmed tweet. USA Today NBA reporter Jeff Zillgitt tweeted that the Golden State Warriors had neither received nor turned down an invitation from the White House: < Per multiple NBA sources, reports right now on Warriors not going to White House are untrue; team hasn’t received invitation or discussed. — Jeff Zillgitt (@JeffZillgitt) June 13, 2017 > The Golden State Warriors released a statement confirming that the reports claiming that the team had rejected the White House’s invitation were premature: < “Today is about celebrating our championship. We have not received an invitation to the White House, but will make those decisions, when and if necessary,” the team said in a statement. > Â

Axson, Scooby.  “Warriors Say Decision Has Not Been Made About White House Visit.”   Sports Illustrated.  13 June 2017.;Letourneau, Connor.  “Warriors’ David West Calls Election of Donald Trump ‘Unsettling.”   SFGate.  9 November 2016.;Wolf, Byron.  “It’d Be Shocking If the Warriors Went to the White House.”   CNN.  13 June 2017.;Feldman, Dan.  “Rumor: Warriors Unanimously Vote Not to Visit Donald Trump’s White House.”   NBC Sports.  13 June 2017.;Gettys, Travis.  “Golden State Warriors Refuse to Visit White House After Winning NBA Title: Reports.”   Raw Story.  13 June 2017.

jared-kushner-go-saudi-arabia-doesnt-extradition-treaty-us

jared-kushner-go-saudi-arabia-doesnt-extradition-treaty-us

Bethania Palma

Jared Kushner took a sudden trip to Saudi Arabia to avoid arrest amid Mueller's probe.

On 29 October 2017, the liberal blog Palmer Report published a story reporting Jared Kushner, President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and White House senior adviser, had “secretly” left the country “ahead of his possible arrest”: < When Robert Mueller begins slapping handcuffs on the first batch of Donald Trump’s co-conspirators tomorrow [30 October 2017], will Trump’s son-in-law Jared Kushner be among them? No one seems to know for sure. Suffice it to say, however, that Kushner is suddenly acting more than a bit suspiciously. In fact, Kushner just boarded a commercial jet and secretly left the country – and Trump’s White House is refusing to answer any questions about what’s going on. Kushner flew to Saudi Arabia, in what was clearly supposed to be a secret trip, as the White House refuses to say why he went there or what he did once he got there. He supposedly returned to the United States on Saturday night, according to a Politico report (link) – but considering the suspicious circumstances, that too could be a cover story; there’s no known proof that he actually did return to the U.S. There are scattered reports that Kushner may have had dinner with Ivanka Trump in Washington on DC on Saturday night, which we’re still working to track down. > Politico did report that Kushner had taken an unannounced trip to Saudi Arabia, two days after news broke that Special Counsel Robert Mueller’s team would begin issuing indictments in an ongoing investigation into alleged collusion between the president’s associates and the Russian government. But simply reading the article, which was the only source cited by Palmer Report, debunks the claim. Politico, published the story after news of looming indictments broke, but Kushner had actually departed two days before that information became public and was back in Washington D.C. to celebrate his wife Ivanka Trump’s birthday before anyone was taken into custody: < Kushner left Washington, D.C., via commercial airline on Wednesday for the trip, which was not announced to the public, a White House official told POLITICO. He traveled separately from Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin, who led a delegation to Riyadh last week to focus on combating terrorist financing. … Kushner arrived back in Washington, D.C., on Saturday night in time for a surprise birthday dinner for his wife, Ivanka Trump, at the Trump International Hotel. > Vanity Fair appears to back the birthday party account. It is true that the United States doesn’t have a bilateral extradition treaty with Saudi Arabia, but that wasn’t the reason for Kushner’s visit. He departed before it was known that Mueller’s team would be issuing indictments, and it’s unknown to the public who the targets of the investigation will ultimately be. In June 2017, the Washington Post reported that Kushner’s financial dealings had come under scrutiny. According to the Politico report, the purpose of Kushner’s trip wasn’t to run from the law, it was diplomatic: < Kushner was accompanied in the region by deputy national security adviser Dina Powell and Middle East envoy Jason Greenblatt. Greenblatt continued from Saudi Arabia to Amman, Jordan; Cairo; the West Bank city of Ramallah; and Jerusalem, where he was on Sunday. The Trump administration has said its strategy is to try to draw in neighboring Arab leaders to play a role in Middle East peace. “Jared has always been driven to try and solve the Israel-Palestinian dispute,” said billionaire real estate investor Tom Barrack, a longtime friend and close Trump confidant. “The key to solving that dispute is Egypt. And the key to Egypt is Abu Dhabi and Saudi Arabia.” > The Palmer Report generally relies on supposition, often extrapolating conclusions from flimsy sourcing, to make rather explosive claims that have fooled many. In May 2017, Massachusetts Sen. Edward Markey was forced to backtrack after making this false statement: < Subpoenas have now been issued in northern Virginia with regard to Flynn and Gen. Flynn’s associates. A grand jury has been impaneled up in New York. > While the first part of that statement was based on a report by CNN, the second sentence stating that a grand jury had been impaneled in New York in relation to Mueller’s investigation was not. The source of that information, according to an aide for Markey, was the Palmer Report.

Palmer, Bill. “Ahead of His Possible Arrest, Jared Kushner Secretly Leaves the Country.”   PalmerReport.com. 29 October 2017.;Karni, Annie. “Kushner Took Unannounced Trip to Saudi Arabia.”   Politico. 29 October 2017.;Fox, Emily Jane. “Ivanka Trump, Amid West Wing Conflagration, Celebrates Her Birthday With Surprise Dinner.”   Vanity Fair. 29 October 2017.;Engel, Pamela. “‘People Want It to Be True’: Inside the Growing Influence of a Mysterious Anti-Trump Website.”   Business Insider. 16 May 2017.

reddit-rape-guidelines

reddit-rape-guidelines

An image accurately states the rights a rape or sexual assault victim universally has in the wake of an attack.

On 2 August 2017, a Reddit user shared a photograph of an information flyer regarding rape and sexual assault to the subreddit r/interestingasfuck: The poster did not provide a source or context for the image, and appeared to interact on Reddit primarily in the form of submissions. The flyer read: < DID YOU KNOW after a rape or sexual assault… You can go to the hospital and not report [the rape or assault] to the police Evidence can be collected for up to 5 days and will be held for up to 6 months whether or not you decide to report to the police Testing for Date Rape Drugs can be done from 24 hrs up to 72 hrs Medications to prevent STD’s and Pregnancy need to be started within 72 hours A rape crisis counselor can go with you to the hospital Everything you do/don’t do is YOUR CHOICE > Although the document appears to be a handout from a rape crisis or advocacy center of some description it also looks as if identifying information (indicating jurisdiction, among other things) had been cropped out, priming the image to be shared by a larger audience.   Nothing claimed in the flyer was particularly bad or harmful advice, but it also targeted assault victims and made promises that might not always be true, such as that a hospital escort would be available. Further, statements about preventive care following an assault are worthy of double-checking, because of the decreased efficacy of such treatments over the course of hours following an assault. The meme’s first claim is that it is possible to seek medical treatment without reporting the rape or assault to the police, a statement that is gray at best. Confidentiality standards maintained by the Rape, Abuse & Incest National Network (RAINN) require sexual assault hotlines to adhere to privacy policies, but we found no sweeping guarantee in the United States that any third party was prohibited from reporting a suspected rape or assault to local authorities. According to the National Network to End Domestic Violence, Inc., in some situations mandated reporters are bound to report suspected assault or rape regardless of the victim’s wishes: < Depending on to whom you report the abuse, if it involves a minor, there may be mandatory reporting requirements for minor victims.  Many states require that health professionals, school officials, and counselors report any accusations of sexual assault, rape, or unlawful sexual contact to child protective services and/or to the police if the victim is a minor.  Mandatory reporting requirements vary by state. You can look up your states specific laws on mandatory reporting requirements for minors in RAINN’s State Law Database. If you are a minor and you want to talk to an adult about sexual assault or abuse without having it be reported to the police or child protective services, it may be a good idea to ask the adult if s/he is a mandatory reporter before you talk to him/her. If s/he says “yes,” you can ask if s/he can refer you to someone who you can talk to confidentially (who is not a mandatory reporter). Alternatively, you may want to call a national or state hotline anonymously without giving any identifying information about yourself. >  A 2013 question-and-answer piece published by Cleveland’s Plain Dealer clarifies: < There is no requirement [a victim] talk to police [if they visit a hospital following a rape or assault]. However, a hospital must inform law enforcement that a probable crime has occurred. If you are an adult, the report can be made without providing your name. > In 2014, Canadian broadcast outlet CBC reported that a hospital visit does not automatically trigger police involvement in Canada, again stipulating that minors do not have the option of refusing police involvement. The meme also said that evidence can be collected for up to five days and would be held for six months in the event the victim opted to involve police at a later date. This is potentially misleading. According to the National Center for Victims of Crime [PDF], the length of time kits are held by law enforcement fluctuates: < This varies from state to state, but is generally equal to the statute of limitations for sexual assault in that state and the amount of time proscribed in the state’s evidence retention laws. There may be reasons to keep the kit indefinitely because of future changes in the statute or technological advances that may provide for future testing. > The same organization noted that advances in DNA testing enabled evidence collection in some cases for up to 96 hours (four days) after an assault. But 12 to 24 hours [PDF] is optimal for investigative purposes, and evidence can deteriorate at the upper end of that window:  < In general, once a body fluid dries to form a stain, the DNA is stable and, thus, can be analyzed over time. However, due to the adverse impact of various environmental conditions (mainly heat and humidity), biological material should be collected for use as evidence as soon as possible. In sexual assault cases, it is important to obtain evidence samples from the victim as soon as possible after the incident, preferably within 12-24 hours. Federal guidelines for sexual assault nurse examiners state that evidence in sexual assault cases should be collected within 72 hours, though some programs are expanding that deadline to 96 hours due to advances in DNA technology. With appropriate storage, DNA evidence collected properly and in a timely manner can be analyzed after the passage of any amount of time. > In other words, four days is stretching the bounds of forensics, and not all jurisdictions hold samples for up to six months. In addition, advocacy groups routinely advise victims to avoid the following before collecting evidence: take a bath or shower brush your teeth go to the bathroom douche change your clothes brush your hair eat or drink anything The meme went on to claim that testing for incapacitating drugs could occur between 24 and 72 hours after an assault, which is complicated by the breadth of substances that fall into that particular category. Although rohypnol (roofies) and gamma-hydroxybutyrate (GHB) are commonly recognized as agents used to incapacitate victims, alcohol and benzodiazepines also are classed as drugs associated with date rape. GHB has a short half-life, but rohypnol can appear in tests for approximately 28 days. The range of drugs used to facilitate non-consensual sexual encounters is broad enough that a specific window of 24 to 72 hours does not fit that wide spectrum. Next, the flyer says that medications to prevent sexually transmitted disease and pregnancy must be started within 72 hours.” The World Health Organization’s guidance on post-assault care recommends something different: < The decision to offer STI prophylaxis should be made on a case-by-case basis. Routine prophylactic treatment of all patients is not generally recommended. > When agencies and organizations do recommend prophylactic antibiotics, we found no time limit included. With respect to emergency contraceptives, intra-uterine devices (IUDs) were considered effective for five days after a rape or unprotected sexual encounter. Oral emergency contraceptives (the “morning after pill”) are not typically recommended after 72 hours, and work best when used as soon as possible after exposure to pregnancy risk. The final bullet point appears specific to whatever entity originally published the list. The claim that victims can obtain an escort without a number to call or other resource provided is open-ended, and clearly not applicable in all situations. According to RAINN, there is a possibility (but no guarantee) victims can connect with the support described on the sheet: < If you call the National Sexual Assault Hotline (800.656.HOPE) or contact a local sexual assault service provider, you may be connected with an advocate who can talk to you about the examination and offer support. The advocate may also be able to accompany you during the actual exam. Be aware that if you invite someone other than an advocate into the exam room, they could be called as a witness if you decide to report the crime. > The rape and sexual assault flyer posted to Reddit offers a mixture of true, false, and likely region-specific information, running the risk of confusing rape and assault victims in the critical hours after an attack. Reference to the upper end of forensic and prophylactic services could lull individuals into a false sense of security, as does the lack of stipulation that minors or other at-risk individuals are often unable to seek medical care without police involvement.

Atassi, Leila and Rachel Dissell.  “What Happens If I Go To The Hospital After Being Sexually Assaulted?”   Cleveland Plain Dealer.  5 August 2013.;Beaudette, Teghan.  “What Happens When You Go To The Hospital After A Sexual Assault?”   CBC News.  21 November 2014.;Linden, Judith A.  “Care Of The Adult Patient After Sexual AssaultCare Of The Adult Patient After Sexual Assault.”   New England Journal of Medicine.  1 September 2011.;McDonald, Karl M.  “DNA Forensic Testing And Use Of DNA Rape Kits In Cases Of Rape And Sexual Assault.”   Forensic Magazine.  26 January 2015.;World Health Organization.  “Guidelines For Medico-Legal Care For Victims Of Sexual Violence.”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;American College of Obstetricians and Gynecologists: Committee on Health Care for Underserved Women.  “Committee Opinion: Sexual Assault.”   April 2014.;NHS Choices.  “What Should I Do Immediately After A Sexual Assault Or Rape?”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;The National Center for Victims of Crime.  “DNA & Crime Victims: What Victim Assistance Professionals Need To Know.”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;The National Center for Victims of Crime.  “Sexual Assault Kit Testing: What Victims Need To Know”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;WebMD.  “Sexual Health, Birth Control, Reference, Plan B One-Step.”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;Vera House Incorporated.  “What If It Happens To Me?”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;WomensLaw.org.  “Sexual Assault / Rape.”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;RAINN.  “About The National Sexual Assault Telephone Hotline.”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;RAINN.  “What Is A Rape Kit?.”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;National Highway Traffic Safety Administration Drugs and Human Performance Fact Sheets.  “Gamma-Hydroxybutyrate (GHB, GBL, And 1,4-BD).”   Accessed 2 August 2017.;Wikipedia.  “Flunitrazepam.”   Accessed 2 August 2017.

In September 2017, the Cleveland Browns, Dallas Cowboys and Pittsburgh Steelers refunded season tickets in light of protests by players during the National Anthem.

In September 2017, amid renewed controversy around football players kneeling during the U.S. national anthem to protest police targeting of African Americans, the “satirical” web site AsAmericanAsApplePie.com falsely reported that the Cleveland Browns and certain other National Football League (NFL) teams had been “forced” to refund season tickets, with the Browns refunding 90%. < NFL teams have been issuing quite a lot of refunds to season ticket holders after players declared war on Donald Trump for correctly pointing out that they should respect the country that allows them to make millions of dollars throwing, kicking, and holding a football, but no team has been hit harder than the Cleveland Browns. Fox News reported last night that former fans are angrily calling every single team and demanding that they be given their money back for their season tickets – purchases made in good faith – after the NFL betrayed them by siding with whiny “athletes” who think that it’s OK to kneel during the National Anthem and disrespect our country and flag. The Dallas Cowboys have refunded money for 65% of season tickets. The Pittsburgh Steelers have given fans money back for 53% of season tickets. But the hardest hit have been the Cleveland Browns, who recently entertained the idea of signing Colin Kaepernick who started this fiasco by kneeling in support of thugs who attack police. The Browns have given a whopping 90% of season ticket holders their money back according to Fox. > At the time that the As American As Apple Pie article was published, Fox News had not reported any of these claims. It’s true that at the time some fans on Twitter claimed to have demanded refunds for season tickets, angry at NFL team owners’ support for players who protested during the national anthem on the opening Sunday of the season. There have been reports that DirectTV has given some customers a refund on NFL season packages, in light of the protests, but we were unable to confirm the veracity of these reports. President Donald Trump added fuel to the fire of an ongoing debate about such protests by saying owners faced with a protesting player should “get that son of a bitch off the field,” and encouraging fans to boycott NFL games unless protesting players were fired or suspended. Trump’s comments seemed only to have solidified many team owners’ support for their players. Jacksonville Jaguars owner Shahid Khan even locked arms with protesting players during the national anthem before a game against the Baltimore Ravens on 24 September 2017. Dee and Jimmy Haslam, owners of the Cleveland Browns – whom As American As Apple Pie claims have been “forced to refund” 90% of season tickets – released a statement expressing support for protesting players, and criticism of President Trump’s intervention. < We must not let misguided, uninformed and divisive comments from the President or anyone else deter us from our efforts to unify. Our stance in support of the liberties of peaceful, personal expression afforded to our players and all Americans will remain strong, and we will continue to encourage our players to respectfully use their earned platform to inspire positive change in our nation and throughout society. > As American As Apple Pie is a “satirical” web site, though many mistake their content for real news. The site describes itself this way:  < When no one can trust the lying fake news liberal media anymore because they hate us and guns and Harley Davidson and meat and OUR president, As American as Apple Pie is here to be your beacon of something you can kinda rely on sometimes but not really. > Â

Graham, Bryan Armen.  “Donald Trump Blasts NFL Anthem Protesters: ‘Get That Son of a Bitch Off the Field.'”   The Guardian.  23 September 2017.;Cleveland Browns.  “Statement from Dee and Jimmy Haslam.”   24 September 2017.;USA Today Sports.  “Jaguars Owner Shahid Khan Joins in on NFL’s National Anthem Protests.”   24 September 2017.

drag-queen-library

drag-queen-library

Viral Phenomena

In October 2017, a "demonic" drag queen read a "sexually explicit" book to children at a Long Beach public library named after Michelle Obama.

MOSTLY FALSE

In October 2017, right-wing web sites reported with a significant degree of alarm that a drag queen in a “Satan-inspired costume” had read to children at a California public library associated with former First Lady Michelle Obama. In their headline, Conservative Fighters falsely claimed that Xochi Mochi had read a “sexually explicit” book to the children. World News Daily reported: < The Michelle Obama public library in Long Beach, California, has presented to children who are part of its young readers program a huge array of diversity and “inclusion” agendas. In one shot. It was when Xochi Mochi arrived for a visit. That made the program pro-LGBTQ. And transgender. And drag queen-friendly. And Satanist-approved, with the character’s red-tipped, demon-like horns. All to read to children for LGBTQ History Month. > The right-wing Media Research Center wrote: < In a nightmare-inducing vision that’s likely spawned years of intense psychological therapy, children at the Michelle Obama Public Library in Venice Beach, California were forced to endure being read kids’ books by a five-horned drag queen in the most terrifying clown makeup known to man. And no, not for Halloween. For diversity. > Setting aside for a moment the alarmist language used to describe this event, the Los Angeles drag performer Xochi Mochi (also known as Jorge Alcantar) did read to children at the Michelle Obama Neighborhood Library in Long Beach, California, on 14 October.  The reading was part of a series called Drag Queen Story Hour, which is run by the writer Michelle Tea and the literary and arts non-profit Radar Productions. Here’s how the Drag Queen Story Hour web site describes the project: < Drag Queen Story Hour (DQSH) is just what it sounds like—drag queens reading stories to children in libraries, schools, and bookstores. DQSH captures the imagination and play of the gender fluidity of childhood and gives kids glamorous, positive, and unabashedly queer role models. In spaces like this, kids are able to see people who defy rigid gender restrictions and imagine a world where people can present as they wish, where dress up is real. > The photograph used in the reports mentioned above is authentic, and was posted to Facebook and Instagram by Xochi Mochi, who added: < I got to read to the children today and it was one of the best experiences I’ve been given as a drag queen. It’s so important to have representation and normalize all the letters in LGBTQIA+ in everyday lives. I saw so many excited faces it filled my heart with so much joy and hope to come back again soon!  > Long Beach Public Library also posted the photograph to its Twitter account, but has since deleted that tweet. (An archived version can be viewed here.) Republican candidate for Congress Omar Navarro asked in a tweet “what are we teaching kids in school?” and claimed the photograph of Xochi Mochi showed “demonic teachings.” Setting aside the fact that the event took place at a library, not a school, the book Xochi Mochi is reading in the photograph is Todd Parr’s children’s book “It’s Okay to be Different,” which includes the following lines: < It’s okay to need some help…It’s okay to be a different color…It’s okay to talk about your feelings…It’s okay to eat macaroni and cheese in the bathtub. > The web sites also made much of the fact that Xochi Mochi’s costume involved horns, though there’s no evidence that those horns are “Satan-inspired.” They could just as well have been inspired by the Greek gods Pan or Dionysus, both of whom are often depicted with horns. Or they could simply be Xochi Mochi’s own invention. Satan and other Christian demons (as well as Pan and Dionysus) are typically portrayed with two horns, rather than the five that Xochi Mochi wore. She was also wearing a pink dress and cape; a gem-encrusted necklace and bracelet; and flowers in her hair and on her cape — all of which are hardly in keeping with Satanist or demonic symbology and suggest that — like most drag — Xochi Mochi’s appearance was driven by playfulness and eclecticism. Contrary to Conservative Fighters’s claim, there is no evidence whatsoever that Xochi Mochi read the children anything “sexually explicit.” Finally, Michelle Obama had no role in the event. The Conservative Fighters web site misleadingly referred to “Michelle Obama’s public library” in its headline, suggesting that the former First Lady owns or operates the institution. She doesn’t, but the library was named in her honor in September 2016.

steelers-villanueva-police-brutality-protest

steelers-villanueva-police-brutality-protest

Pittsburgh Steelers coach Mike Tomlin "ripped" one of his players, Alejandro Villanueva, for standing near the sidelines during the playing of the national anthem before an NFL game.

In late September 2017, various right-wing web sites claimed Pittsburgh Steelers head coach Mike Tomlin had “ripped” one of his players, offensive tackle Alejandro Villanueva, during a post-game press conference: While Tomlin and the rest of the team stayed in the locker room during the national anthem before playing the Chicago Bears that day, Villanueva — a United States Army veteran who served three tours of duty in Afghanistan — stood outside the tunnel leading onto the field at Soldier Field in Chicago. During his press conference after the Steelers’ loss, Tomlin said that his players decided not to appear for the anthem after discussing whether the team would respond to insults thrown at both the National Football League and former San Francisco quarterback Colin Kaepernick by United States President Donald Trump. Trump had said that NFL owners should respond to Kaepernick and other players protesting extrajudicial killings on the part of police by saying, “Get that son of a bitch off the field right now, he’s fired. He’s fired.” Tomlin said that it was the team’s decision, not his, to not appear on the field during the national anthem: < Like most teams in the National Football League we didn’t ask for this. This was placed upon us by circumstance. I heard rumblings of guys talking during the course of the day yesterday. My contention was that we would not allow politics to divide us. We’re football players. We’re a football team. If any of them felt like something needed to be done I asked those guys to discuss it. And whatever they discussed, that we have 100 percent participation or we do nothing. They discussed it for an appropriate length of time. They couldn’t come to an understanding, so they chose to remove themselves from it. They were not going to be disrespectful in the anthem. So they chose not to participate, but at the same time, many of them were not going to accept the words of the president. So we decided to sit it out, to not take the field. To remove ourselves from it, to focus on playing football. So those were our intentions. > When a reporter pointed out that Villanueva was out of the tunnel during the anthem, Tomlin said: < Like I said, I was looking for 100 percent participation. We were gonna be respectful of our football team. Man, these are divisive times in the United States, and it’s a shame but it is. But we’re not politicians. We’re coaches and professional athletes. If those of us individuals choose to, you know, choose to participate in politics in some way I’m supportive of that. But when we come out of locker rooms, man, we come out of locker rooms to play football games. And to be quite honest with you, man, I didn’t appreciate our football team being drug [sic] into politics this weekend. And I’m sure that that’s a global perspective. But we’re blessed to do this for a living and so with that blessing comes responsibility. We understand that. We understand that we’re given a platform that’s a unique one. Many of us are called to maybe do things that we wouldn’t usually do because of that platform, where people apply pressure to us to do things because of that platform. And the bottom line is, we chose not to play ball today in that regard. Maybe we will. But today we just said “no.” > The statement did not criticize or condemn Villanueva’s actions, contrary to claims reported online. Photographs of Villanueva showed other team members standing in the tunnel behind him. On 25 September 2017, Villanueva said that he asked one of the team’s captains, quarterback Ben Roethlisberger, if he could watch the anthem from the tunnel rather than remaining in the locker room: < He agreed, and said the captains would be right out there behind me. So this plan sort of morphed to accommodate this tough moral dilemma that I had on my hands to where the players could be behind me in the tunnel. Ben Roethlisberger said, “At [12]:56 make sure you’re out there ’cause the national anthem’s gonna start at 12:57. I walked out at 12:56, I asked one of the security guards when the national anthem was gonna start. He said, “Twenty seconds.” So I just walked out and stopped as soon as I saw the flag. As soon as I saw a vantage point, that to me was enough. There was a flag that was coming in from one of the previous celebrations and when I turned around to sort of, you know, signal everybody else to come in so that they wouldn’t leave me alone they were essentially unable to exit. So at that moment it was the decision of, do you walk out of the national anthem and join your teammates? I know that would’ve looked extremely bad — or as a team do you start moving halfway through the national anthem? Essentially what we can get out of this is that we butchered our plan to sort of have a response for the national anthem and respect everyone’s opinions. > According to Villanueva, he only told the team captains about his idea, meaning that his other teammates did not have an opportunity to join him outside the tunnel. < That was the very embarrassing part on my end of what transpired: everybody sees an image of me standing by myself. Everybody thinks that the team, the Steelers, are not behind me. That’s absolutely wrong; it’s quite the opposite. > He added: < I made coach Tomlin look bad, and that is my fault and my fault only. I made my teammates look bad, and that is my fault and my fault only. I made a mistake. > In a separate press conference on 26 September 2017, Tomlin expressed solidarity with Villanueva: < I don’t know why Villanueva was apologizing. He had nothing to apologize for. I guess he just feels like he brought this upon us, and that’s a shame. > Kaepernick originated the protests prior to the 2016 regular season, originally sitting on the bench during the anthem. Former Seattle Seahawks player Nate Boyer — a veteran of the U.S. Army Special Forces —said in September 2016 that after discussing the issue with the quarterback, Kaepernick agreed to carry out his silent demonstration by kneeling: < We sorta came to a middle ground where he would take a knee alongside his teammate. Soldiers take a knee in front of a fallen brother’s grave, you know, to show respect. When we’re on a patrol, you know, and we go into a security halt, we take a knee, and we pull security. > We have contacted the Steelers seeking further comment.

Tatum, Sophie. “Trump: NFL Owners Should Fire Players who Protest The National Anthem.” CNN. 23 September 2017.;Kalaf, Samer. “Alejandro Villanueva Didn’t Want Any Of This.” Deadspin. 26 September 2017.;Brinson, Will. “Here’s How Nate Boyer Got Colin Kaepernick To Go From Sitting to Kneeling.” CBS Sports. 27 September 2016.;Pittsburgh Steelers. “Tomlin Tuesday.” 26 September 2017.;Sandritter, Mark. “A Timeline of Colin Kaepernick’s National Anthem Protest and The Athletes Who Joined Him.” SB Nation. 25 September 2017.

do-sonic-weapons-explain-the-health-diplomats-cuba

do-sonic-weapons-explain-the-health-diplomats-cuba

An inaudible sonic weapon adequately explains the range of symptoms experienced by diplomats suffering from “health attacks” in Cuba.

A mysterious international dispute that threatens the recently thawed diplomatic relationship between the United States and Cuba came to light in a 10 August 2017 story first reported by the Associated Press. The report focused on a series of seemingly related illnesses suffered by American and Canadian diplomats serving in Cuba. The original reporting included what later appeared to be speculation from unnamed United States government officials that some form of heretofore unknown sonic weapon was to blame: < In the fall of 2016, a series of U.S. diplomats began suffering unexplained losses of hearing, according to officials with knowledge of the investigation into the case. Several of the diplomats were recent arrivals at the embassy, which reopened in 2015 as part of President Barack Obama’s reestablishment of diplomatic relations with Cuba. Some of the U.S. diplomats’ symptoms were so severe that they were forced to cancel their tours early and return to the United States, officials said. After months of investigation, U.S. officials concluded that the diplomats had been attacked with an advanced sonic weapon that operated outside the range of audible sound and had been deployed either inside or outside their residences. > The U.S. State Department later walked back claims that they specifically had concluded a sonic weapon was at play, saying through a spokesperson that “we do not know who or what is causing these incidents”. Secretary of State Rex Tillerson has described the incidents as “health attacks”, and Cuba denies any involvement. As reported by the Associated Press on 18 September 2017, the range of symptoms is nonspecific and vague: < Of the 21 medically confirmed U.S. victims, some have permanent hearing loss or concussions, while others suffered nausea, headaches and ear-ringing. Some are struggling with concentration or common word recall, the AP has reported. Some victims felt vibrations or heard loud sounds mysteriously audible in only parts of rooms, leading investigators to consider a potential “sonic attack.” Others heard nothing but later developed symptoms. > In sum, the symptoms (none of which are universal to all cases) that have been used in the defense of the claim that a “sonic weapon” was used are as follows: Additional clues into the nature of the attack, including the occurrence of an audible noise in some cases, were provided first by a 20 August 2017 CNN report, reporting that some diplomats heard “a deafeningly loud [but unidentified] sound similar to the buzzing created by insects or metal scraping across a floor”. CBS News reported: < Some felt vibrations, and heard sounds — loud ringing or a high-pitch chirping similar to crickets or cicadas. Others heard the grinding noise. > The reports of screeching noises in some cases and no noise in most cases initially fed both government and media speculation that a “silent” audible device was most likely used (there are ranges of noise close to audible sound that can be heard by some but not others). The two options, then, would be an infrasonic device (below the audible frequency humans hear) or an ultrasonic device (above that range). The debate about which brand of inaudible noise would be used generally boils down to this: infrasonic waves capable of affecting humans covertly would need to be extremely close to the victim or unrealistically large, and they would not be able to produce a targeted attack, instead affecting a larger and thus more indiscriminate area. Ultrasonic waves could be targeted, focused, and beamed from further away, but are unlikely to cause a bulk of the symptoms ascribed to them and unless the device was physically touching the victim. Before diving into this research, two variables related to sound are necessary to understand what follows. These include the frequency of the noise — defined by the number of waves per unit of time — and also its power, determined by the amount of energy each wave carries. The former is reported in Hz or kHz, with infrasound including noise below 20 Hz, and ultrasound encompassing noise above 20 kHz (20,000 Hz). (The latter is reported in decibels or dB.) Below, we detail the main research regarding the primary symptoms discussed in the reporting of the Cuban “health attacks”, finding a.) that the evidence is fairly weak for both ultrasound and infrasound as the cause for a majority of the symptoms listed and b.) that none of the symptoms can be described entirely by either only infrasound or only ultrasound. Hearing Loss The source most commonly cited in news reports suggesting that infrasound can cause hearing loss is a 2001 review conducted by the NIH, which stated (with heavy qualification) that research, while sparse, shows “physical damage to the ear or some loss of hearing has been found in humans and/or animals at levels above 140 dB”. The 140 dB measurement is no minor omission of detail, as 140 dB infrasonic waves projected covertly at any distance are essentially impossible. The actual studies reviewed in this NIH document generally suggest the opposite: low-frequency, high-power noise will not cause hearing loss, temporary or otherwise, if below the considerably high energy of 150 dB. Ultrasonic sound is widely considered to be irrelevant to hearing loss. Another 2001 review by Jürgen Altmann, an acoustic weapons expert and physicist at Germany’s Technische Universitaet Dortmund and who investigated the bulk of the literature up to that time, concluded that at ultrasound “the ear is essentially untouched” if levels are below 140 dB. Fatigue, Headaches, Ringing Ears, Vertigo, and Nausea Based on the reviews performed by both the NIH and by Altmann, there is no scientific consensus on fatigue, headaches, ringing ears, or vertigo as they apply to infrasonic noise. The only symptom in this category discussed as a possible result of infrasonic noise is nausea. Per the NIH: < There is no agreement about the biological activity of infrasound. Reported effects include […] nausea, vomiting, and bowel spasm. > Altmann (and many others) argued that the gastrointestinal symptoms such as nausea, and bowel spasms in particular, while frequently reported in the press, have been overblown and cannot conclusively be tied to infrasonic sound: < The vertigo and nausea effects in the journalistic articles ascribed to intense infrasound cannot be confirmed. On the other hand, low [but still audible] frequencies of 50-100 Hz at 150 to 155 dB caused mild nausea. > Many of the above symptoms (headaches, ringing ears, nausea, and fatigue), however, were once referred to in the literature as “ultrasonic sickness”. This suite of symptoms and their ties to ultrasonic noise was based on numerous reports from workers in proximity to a variety of ultrasonic devices or tools. Altmann has argued that this literature is hard to interpret as these environments contain significant audible sound, as well. A 2013 review of the effects of ultrasound on humans makes a similar argument: < Many studies confirmed the appearance of subjective symptoms of exposure to noise emitted by ultrasonic devices like dizziness, balance disturbances, tinnitus and fatigue. It is assumed that those symptoms result from the effect of noise on the vestibular system; however, further studies are necessary. […] According to the results of studies in the 1960s and 1970s, “audible” components of the noise spectrum are, above all, responsible for subjective symptoms among workers exposed to noise emitted by ultrasonic devices. > Concentration and memory problems There are few human studies addressing the neurological effects of infrasonic sound on cognition. Within those, a few single studies demonstrate a connection between infrasound and cognition on humans and animals. Overall, however, most research demonstrates no connection at all, and none have suggested permanent or persistent issues after exposure, as stated in the National Institutes of Health’s 2001 review: < In several experiments to assess cognitive performance during exposure to infrasound […] no reduction in performance was observed in the subjects. Sole exposure to infrasound at 10 to 15 Hz and 130 to 135 dB for 30 minutes also did not produce changes in autonomic nervous functions. > In terms of ultrasound, the 2013 review noted that many concentration issues could be associated with the symptoms of “ultrasonic sickness” without being directly caused by the noise itself: < It is worth mentioning that some subjective effects of exposure to ultrasonic noise such as fatigue, headache, discomfort or irritation may disturb human cognitive functions. > This body of research refers to the transient appearance of these symptoms when in direct contact with that sound, and makes no suggestion of prolonged memory problems like word recall. Outside of occupational studies that lack relevance to sonic weapon development and by their nature include audible sound as well, there is little evidence in humans to suggest that ultrasound can be the cause for permanent neurological damage. Mild Traumatic Brain Injury Altmann, author of the 2001 review of acoustic weapons, told the Associated Press: < I know of no acoustic effect or device that could produce traumatic brain injury or concussion-like symptoms. > The only real mechanism for a damage to the internal organ system such as the brain would be through some sort of powerful internal vibration caused by the strong vibration of the sound waves themselves. Scientists agree that this would best be achieved by infrasound, but the evidence that such frequencies could actually make this happen is quite limited and derived almost entirely from studies on animals or anecdotal reports. A 2009 review published in the journal Military Medicine notes that “remarkable properties have been attributed to infrasound, including the capacity to ‘debilitate people for hours and even days,’ with ‘pulsing in their internal organs and blurred vision, both of which can lead to …, in rare cases, death,'” but this review also highlights the reality that there are nearly no studies to back up such claims. In fact, studies performed as far back as 1978 and as recently as 2009 conclude that an infrasonic weapon used to harm major organ systems would be implausible — if not completely impossible. In terms of ultrasound, it is essentially impossible for this kind of energy to penetrate into the human body without direct contact, as the waves dissipate rapidly through the air (and, it should be noted, pretty rapidly within the body as well). Responding to questions that ultrasonic waves could cause brain damage, Robin Cleveland, a professor of engineering science at the University of Oxford, told the Guardian he doesn’t buy it: “The sound would have to enter the brain tissue itself […]. If there’s even a tiny bit of air between the sound and your body it doesn’t get through.” Blood Disorders Without knowing more than that a victim experienced “a more serious illness that involved a blood disorder” it is hard to confidently assess plausibility of this this kind of disease except to say that the reasons ultrasonic noise do not explain brain damage would likely hold for any illness that requires sound to penetrate into the body. According to the NIH, the most consistently reported effect of infrasonic noise (though the mechanisms remains unclear) seem to be changes in blood pressure and respiratory rate, which could perhaps be linked to other diseases indirectly. There is no existing evidence that links noise of any kind to the development of a blood disorder. In the End, Neither Infrasound or Ultrasound Work as an Explanation Taking even the most tenuous scientific research at face value, an ultrasonic device could be responsible for the transient occurrence of fatigue, headaches, ringing ears, vertigo, and nausea and (even more dubious) concentration and memory issues. Taking a similarly loose approach for infrasound, this kind of noise could cause hearing loss, nausea, and (most dubiously) some form of organ discomfort or damage. Neither can explain all of the symptoms. Further, there is no real way to create a covert version of either device. F. Joseph Pompei, a former MIT researcher and current chief executive officer of a company that develops devices that focus sound into narrow, targeted beams, told us that a focused or controllable beam of 20Hz (infrasonic) sound would require an array of subwoofers “the size of a stadium”. Conversely, he told us, for an ultrasonic device to penetrate into the body at all, the victim would either have to be submerged in water or have the device in physical contact (both conditions would allow those waves to pass into the body without reflecting off it). This, as well, seems unlikely to be a covert choice for an attack. “It sounds very appealing and interesting, but I find it hard to believe that there actually is such a device,”  John Oghalai, Chair of the Caruso Department of Otolaryngology – Head and Neck Surgery at the University of Southern California, told The Verge. Collectively, the scientific research — which in many cases notes that anecdotal and inaccurate reports in newspapers have long obfuscated the actual science behind the plausibility of such a device — demonstrates that no single brand of sound could create the range of symptoms described by the victims of the Cuban health attacks, and even if they could, a covert device would be hard if not impossible to design. As such we rank the specific claim that an inaudible sonic device adequately explains the health attacks in Cuba as false.

Lee, Matthew, and Michael Weissenstein.  “Hearing Loss of Us Diplomats in Cuba Blamed on Covert Device.”   Associated Press.  10 August 2017.;Samuelson, Kate and Justin Worland.  “U.S. Diplomats in Cuba Were Injured by a ‘Sonic Weapon.’ What Is That?”   Time.  10 August 2017.;Associated Press.  “Top US Diplomat Says Closing Embassy in Cuba ‘Under Review.'”   10 August 2017.;Koran, Laura et al.  “Mysterious Attacks on Us Diplomats in Cuba Occurred as Recently as Last Month.”   CNN.  4 September 2017.;CBS News.  “Some U.S. Diplomats in Cuba Diagnosed with Serious Health Conditions, Medical Records Show.”   23 August 2017.;Robles, Frances and Kirk Semple.  “‘Health Attacks’ on U.S. Diplomats in Cuba Baffle Both Countries.”   The New York Times .  11 August 2017.;Altmann, Jurgen.  “Acoustic Weapons — A Prospective Assessment”   Science & Global Security.  2001;National Toxicology Program [U.S.].  “Infrasound: Brief Review of Toxicological Literature”   November 2001.;Smagowska, Bożena, and Małgorzata Pawlaczyk-Łuszczyńska.  “Effects of Ultrasonic Noise on the Human Body — A Bibliographic Review”   International Journal of Occupational Safety and Ergonomics.  2013.;Cook, Michael C., and James R Jauchem.  “High-Intensity Acoustics for Military Nonlethal Applications: A Lack of Useful Systems.”   Military Medicine.  February 2007.;Broner, N.  “The Effects of Low Frequency Noise on People — A Review”   Journal of Sound and Vibration.  1978.;Devlin, Hannah.  “How Could the ‘Sonic Attack’ on US Diplomats in Cuba Have Been Carried Out?”   The Guardian.  25 August 2017.;Becker, Rachel.  “Weaponizing Sound: Could Sonic Devices Have Injured Diplomats in Cuba?”   The Verge.  16 September 2017.

military-veteran-espn-2011

military-veteran-espn-2011

David Mikkelson

Photographs show a 2011 NFL Veterans Day tribute that ESPN omitted from their pre-game coverage.

< Monday night 11/14/2011 at Lambeau Field This is what ESPN failed to show you Monday night, 11/14/2011. Apparently, they thought their commercials were more important than showing this scene for about 5 seconds. > On the evening of 14 November 2011, the NFL’s Green Bay Packers hosted the Minnesota Vikings in a football match-up held at Lambeau Field in Green Bay which was televised by ESPN as part of that network’s Monday Night Football schedule. As the previous Friday (11 November) had been Veterans Day, the Packers announced they would be staging a number of Veterans Day-themed events before the game and during halftime: < The Green Bay Packers’ Monday night game against the Minnesota Vikings is dedicated to showing appreciation to the U.S. Military through a variety of activities in recognition of Veteran’s Day. Upon entering Lambeau Field fans will receive an American flag, compliments of the Wisconsin Army National Guard and Oshkosh Defense. Attendees will also take part in an in-stadium USAA card stunt to thank veterans and current military for their service. The USO of Wisconsin will be standing by with Oshkosh Defense in the parking lot to accept phone cards for the military. People can drop off phone calling cards to the USO reps at the Oshkosh Defense M-ATV, or can donate cash to be used to purchase cards for their “Operation Phone Home” efforts. If bringing cards, people are encouraged to get international cards, which provide the most reliable service for the military members. Other military-themed activities scheduled include a large on-field flag with stars representing all military branches during the national anthem, military shout-outs on TundraVision, and a halftime show featuring the Wisconsin National Guard 132nd Army Band and fireworks display. The Packers and WPS will also be recognizing and welcoming home 1st Lieutenant Infantry Officer Kent Gavin through Operation Fan Mail on-field prior to the national anthem. Gavin will be accompanied by his fiancée and her parents. The national anthem will be performed by Steel Magnolia’s Meghan Linsey and Joshua Scott Jones. > Some of those activities, such as the pre-game card stunts in which the stadium crowd spelled out messages including “Thank You Veterans” and “Thank You Military” and the unfurling of a large flag on the field during the playing of the national anthem, were captured in the photographs displayed above and audience videos such as the following: Within days of the game, reports (such as the following account from Milwaukee television station WTMJ) began to trickle out expressing disappointment that only spectators present at the game had been able to view the pre-game Veterans Day tribute activities at Lambeau Field, as ESPN did not include them in their telecast: < Packers fans inside Lambeau Field had a chance to take part in a special moment to honor America’s veterans before the Packers-Vikings game Monday night. Most of them raised a card to help form a pattern that said “Thank You Veterans” and American flags. However, most of the nation did not see the tribute, as ESPN-TV was taking a commercial break during the national anthem. > We contacted ESPN to invite them to explain the circumstances behind why the tribute had not been aired, and they sent us the following response: < We appreciate and applaud these entertainers for their hard work and talent, but exposure of them before games and at halftime can’t be guaranteed. Our pre-game and halftime features have proven to be very popular with our fans and they’ve come to depend on tuning into ESPN, The World’s Biggest Sports Fan, to catch up-to-date scores and sports news. > This theme was played upon in a satirical 31 January 2012 Daily Spoof article which posited that the performance of the U.S. national anthem before the upcoming Super Bowl XLVI game would be pre-empted on television by a commercial for Dodge trucks: < Football fans watching Super Bowl XLVI can remain seated during the pregame ceremonies this year, because the singing of The Star-Spangled Banner will be preempted by a television commercial for Dodge trucks. “At $7 million a minute, we can’t spare the time it takes for the National Anthem to be performed,” NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell explained. “And don’t try to accuse us of being unpatriotic here. No one’s a bigger fan of Belichick and Brady than I am. It’s just that the advertiser made us an offer we can’t refuse.” The sponsor of the ad, the Chrysler Corporation, is now owned by the Italian automaker Fiat. > Some readers who encountered this article out of its original context took it seriously, but as noted in the article’s disclaimer, “The story above is a satire or parody. It is entirely fictitious.” One photograph typically included with this item was not taken on the date of the Veteran’s Day-themed events at Lambeau Field, but rather during the season-opening game two months earlier:

morgan-freeman-jailing-hillary-restore-faith

morgan-freeman-jailing-hillary-restore-faith

Actor Morgan Freeman said that jailing former presidential candidate Hillary Clinton is the best way to restore public faith in the United States government.

On 29 October 2017, the disreputable web site Your News Wire published a fake news article which contained several (fictitious) quotes from actor Morgan Freeman about his (fictitious) desire to imprison Hillary Clinton: < The best way to restore public faith in government institutions is to “send Hillary to prison“, according to Hollywood icon Morgan Freeman, who warns that unless the former First Lady’s crimes are seen to be punished, “everyday Americans will forever know, deep down, that there is one law for those with money and power, and another for the rest of us.” “Hillary should be in jail for her unlawful deeds and President Trump should absolutely, absolutely make sure this happens to send the very strong message that no-one, and I mean no-one, is above the law in the United States of America,” Morgan Freeman said in New York while promoting National Geographic’s new docu-series The Story of Us. > This is not a genuine quote from Morgan Freeman; YourNewsWire.com is a particularly vicious fake news blog that has a long history of publishing corrosive misinformation. The site claims that the actor made this comment while promoting his new documentary series “The Story of Us” during an event in New York, but, naturally, provided no video from the event containing Morgan’s alleged remarks, as none exists. Furthermore, the “Story of Us” premiere was held on 28 September 2017, more than a month before Your News Wire published this article. It is possible that Freeman held additional promotional events (although it would be odd for the press tour to continue long after the premiere), but we could not find any news articles regarding a promotional event in New York for the series near this article’s publication date. It is also unlikely that Freeman would ever suggest the idea that President Donald Trump should imprison Hillary Clinton. The actor openly supported of the Democratic candidate and even narrated several political ads for Clinton. Despite the fact that Morgan Freeman never said that Hillary Clinton should be imprisoned, the fake quote was picked up by a number of disreputable sources, such as the “Punisher’s Patriot News Watch” Facebook page and the web site nnettle.com. Actor James Woods also helped popularize this fake quote on Twitter. (Wood’s tweet has since been deleted.) Although Your News Wire used a fake quote as the basis for their article, they did mention a genuine quote from Morgan Freeman in their concluding paragraphs. Freeman appeared in a video for the Committee to Investigate Russia, where he asked Trump to “tell us the truth”:Â

Mele, Christopher.  “Morgan Freeman Angers Russians Over Video About 2016 Election.”   New York Times.  22 September 2017.

In September 2017, Nike cut ties with the Dallas Cowboys over national anthem protests.

Amid the ongoing controversy over National Football League players’ protesting police violence during the national anthem, the “satirical” web site As American As Apple Pie falsely reported on 26 September 2017 that sportswear manufacturer Nike, Inc. had cut ties with the Dallas Cowboys: < The Dallas Cowboys, led by owner and traitor to those to whom he owes his freedom, Jerry Jones, lost the title of “America’s Team” along with the respect of millions of fans when they took ma knee to side with thuggery before the National Anthem last night. That decision, to play both sides and continue the divisiveness of Barack Obama, has now cost them dearly. Nike, the largest athletic company and number one sponsor of professional sports in the world, has canceled all dealings with the Dallas Cowboys. Company CEO Isaac P. Freely told Fox Sports: “To come out on the field and kneel to thugs and criminals just before saluting the flag was a reprehensible move our company won’t easily forgive. The Dallas Cowboys are no longer licensed to wear, display or sell merchandise with the Nike name or logo on it.” > The story is entirely fabricated. Nike has made no such decision, and thus there was no interview on Fox Sports with Isaac P. Freely, whose name was invented for comic effect. The fake story came after Cowboys owner Jerry Jones locked arms with players and joined them in kneeling during the national anthem before a game against the Arizona Cardinals on 25 September 2017. Not only has Nike not cut ties with Jones and the Cowboys over their protests, the company released a statement expressing support for the players’ right to self-expression: < Nike supports athletes and their right to freedom of expression on issues that are of great importance to our society. > This story, like everything published by As American As Apple Pie, is a work of fiction. The web site carries this tongue-in-cheek disclaimer about the veracity of its articles: < When no on can trust the lying fake news liberal media anymore because they hate us and guns and Harley Davidson and meat and OUR president. As American As Apple Pie is here to be your beacon of something you can kinda rely on sometimes but not really. >

Astor, Maggie. “How N.F.L. Sponsors Have Reacted to ‘Take a Knee’ Protests.”   New York Times. 27 September 2017.

anonymous-daily-stormer

anonymous-daily-stormer

Anonymous seized the domain of white supremacist site Daily Stormer and announced its imminent demise.

After the neo-Nazi web site The Daily Stormer mocked a woman who was killed at a 12 August 2017 white supremacist rally in Virginia, the domain host GoDaddy announced that it would no longer host the site:  < We informed The Daily Stormer that they have 24 hours to move the domain to another provider, as they have violated our terms of service. — GoDaddy (@GoDaddy) August 14, 2017 > GoDaddy published the tweet at 10:24 PM Eastern Standard Time on 13 August 2017. Less than a day later, a post appeared on Daily Stormer claiming that the domain had been seized by the decentralized international activist collective Anonymous: < END OF HATE: ANONYMOUS NOW IN CONTROL OF DAILY STORMER #TANGODOWN THIS SITE IS NOW UNDER THE CONTROL OF ANONYMOUS WE HAVE TAKEN THIS SITE IN THE NAME OF HEATHER HEYER A VICTIM OF WHITE SUPREMACIST TERRORISM FOR TOO LONG THE DAILY STORMER AND ANDREW ANGLIN HAVE SPEWED THEIR PUTRID HATE ON THIS SITE … THIS EVIL CANNOT BE ALLOWED TO STAND IT TOOK A UNITED FORCE OF ELITE HACKERS FROM AROUND THE WORLD TO BREACH THE SYSTEMS AND THE FIREWALL WE HAVE HAD THE DAILY STORMER IN OUR SITES FOR MONTHS NOW THE EVENTS OF CHARLOTTESVILLE ALERTED US TO THE NEED FOR IMMEDIATE ACTION WE WANT YOU NAZIS TO KNOW: YOUR TIME IS SHORT WE WILL ALLOW THE SITE TO REMAIN ONLINE FOR 24 HOURS SO THE WORLD CAN WITNESS THE HATE THEN WE WILL SHUT IT DOWN PERMANENTLY HACKERS OF THE WORLD HAVE UNITED IN DEFENSE OF THE JEWISH PEOPLE YOU SHOULD HAVE EXPECTED US > The Twitter account@YourAnonNews, which, while not official, is widely viewed as the most accurate source for known Anonymous action, had indicated a response to the events in Virginia was forthcoming shortly before the post appeared: < This is just getting started. Browse the images of the Alt-Reich at Charlottesville and see if you know anyone. #OpDomesticTerrorism — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 > However, shortly after the post began grabbing headlines, the account pointed out several reasons to be skeptical that the collective had taken over The Daily Stormer. For one thing, the window cited by GoDaddy (24 hours) was identical to the timeframe provided in the “Anonymous” post:  < We have no confirmation that “Anonymous” is involved yet. Looks more like a DS stunt. Wonder if they are having issues finding a new host. https://t.co/ikXXRBfC5p — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 > < We find claim that it took a “UNITED FORCE OF ELITE HACKERS” to hack a CMS run by amateurs incredibly amusing. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 > < If the CMS was compromised and under control by an activism motivated attacker, why leave up the old content? Easy enough to delete. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 >  < Look at the cliche script of the site. It will give them a cute claim later that we’re part of the “Jewish Conspiracy” they rant about it. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 > In a separate response, @YourAnonNews noted that the nature of the collective made the claim difficult to discount, but they remained highly skeptical: < Anything’s possible. But if that were the case, we’d probably have received a communication about it. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 >  < We are 99% confident that this is a completely false stunt by DS derps. Still not anyone taking credit, despite feelers. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 > By contrast, the account appeared to confirm that members of the group had shut down the Charlottesville city web site using a denial of service (DDOS) attack. The action came as part of what the group is calling #OpDomesticTerrorism, and was a protest against perceived inaction by Charlottesville police: < Not all of us support targeting public resources, nor do we all agree with DDOS. But the article’s author communicated with valid sources. — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 > Although the decentralized nature of Anonymous (as explained by @YourAnonNews) makes it difficult to fully debunk the claim Daily Stormer was downed as part of #OpDomesticTerrorism, we are highly skeptical that the claim is true. No faction of Anonymous claimed credit, other objectionable content on the site was left intact, and most damningly, the window cited in the “hacked” post was identical to GoDaddy’s provided timeframe for Daily Stormer’s shutdown. The “Anonymous” post on Daily Stormer also failed to mention Heather Heyer, the woman killed at the rally who The Daily Stormer later mocked. However, the post did succeed in providing the condemned web site a flood of traffic: < Stop giving the Faily Stormer what it wants: Traffic.https://t.co/xdvp41V2hW — Anonymous (@YourAnonNews) August 14, 2017 > On 2:21 PM Eastern Standard Time, Reuters confirmed Google was cancelling Daily Stormer’s domain registration after it was reported that the site obtained a replacement provider: < UPDATE: Google spokesperson says company is canceling Daily Stormer’s registration for violating Google terms of service pic.twitter.com/y1VmYukS4z — Reuters Tech News (@ReutersTech) August 14, 2017 >

Chappell, Bill.  “Daily Stormer Site Moves To Google’s Web Service After Ban By GoDaddy.”   NPR.  14 August 2017.;Grierson, Jamie and Samuel Gibbs.  “Message Showing Apparent Hack Appears On Neo-Nazi Daily Stormer Website.”   The Guardian.  14 August 2017.;The Daily Stormer.  “End Of Hate: Anonymous Now In Control Of Daily Stormer.”   14 August 2017.

melania-trump-body-double

melania-trump-body-double

A video shows a "fake" Melania Trump standing next to the president.

A bizarre rumor holding that President Trump was using a Melania Trump body double at a press conference took hold on social media in October 2017 after Facebook user Andrea Wagner Barton posted photographic “evidence” of the charge: < Will the real Melania please stand up? Is it me or during his speech today a decoy “stood in” for Melania?? And…. Why would the moron say “my wife, Melania, who happens to be right here…” Seriously, watch very closely! > A video purportedly showing this “fake” Melania Trump was also widely circulated on social media. As of this writing, Barton’s post has racked up more than 9 million views: The footage above was captured by filming a television screen showing a CNN report from 13 October 2017. When compared to the actual video available on CNN‘s web site, it’s apparent that the strange visual was caused by the TV screen and not a faux first lady. Here’s a screenshot from the Facebook video (left) compared to a still from the video available on CNN.com. Note that Melania’s face is slightly shrunken, distorted, and rounder  in the Facebook video: This not evidence of a body double. It’s evidence of a poorly working television. Several other images of the first lady from the same day are also available from news organizations such as Getty Images and and the Associated Press. Many of those photographs, such as the following image from the White House, featured the first lady sans sunglasses, clearly showing that this woman is in fact Melania Trump and not some impostor:

jared-kushner-register-vote-new-york-woman

jared-kushner-register-vote-new-york-woman

Jared Kushner registered to vote as a woman in New York.

On 27 September 2017, Wired magazine reported that Jared Kushner, United States President Donald Trump’s son-in-law and one of his senior advisors, has been registered to vote in New York as a woman: < According to the records held by the New York State Board of Elections, Jared Corey Kushner is a woman. Is Kushner a woman? Did he just accidentally fill out the form incorrectly? Is he the victim of a malicious voter impersonation scheme? Unfortunately, there’s absolutely no way to know for sure, because he has yet to provide WIRED with a comment. But based on his recent history with paperwork, option two seems like a pretty safe bet. > The story went viral, in part because Kushner has a long history of allegedly misfiling forms, most infamously his national security questionnaires — which have, at various times, omitted numerous foreign contacts and which at one point listed some graduation dates and his own father-in-law’s address incorrectly. Wired’s information came from liberal opposition research group American Bridge, who used a third-party information source separate from the New York voter registration system to uncover the information about his voter registration status. Later reporting from the New York Daily News, however, quoted members of the New York City Board of Elections who said the blame was theirs — a data entry issue that likely stemmed from his gender being listed as “unknown” in earlier New Jersey registration rolls prior to filing in New York: < The Nexis data cited by Wired is from 2009. In a New Jersey voter registration before 2009, Kushner’s gender was listed as “unknown.” Board of Elections Executive Director Michael Ryan confirmed that this was an error on the board’s part. He said it was “impossible to go back in time” and figure out how the mistake happened, but he suspected Kushner’s ambiguous New Jersey registration led to the mixup. > Wired is correct that, during the time period in which Kushner was voting in New York and up until this week, his gender was officially entered into the New York City voter roll database system as “female”. This mix-up, which was corrected internally after the story came out, cannot be blamed on Kushner’s own inability to fill out his New York voter registration correctly; New York Daily News obtained Kushner’s 2011 New York City voter registration form, which clearly shows he checked off the box marked “male”: We have reached out to the New York City Board of Elections to verify if the Daily News reporting is accurate, and will update this page if anything comes to light that changes that view. However, as the executive director of the New York City Board of Elections is on record as saying the mix up was a data-entry issue and not a filing issue, we rank the claim that Jared Kushner registered to vote as a female in New York as false.

Feinberg, Ashley.  “Jared Kushner Voted as a Woman, According to His Registration.”   Wired.  27 September 2017.;Chason, Rachel.  “A Database Error May Be Why Jared Kushner Is Registered to Vote as a Woman.”   Washington Post.  28 September 2017.;Silverstein, Jason.  “Jared Kushner Actually Is Registered to Vote as a Male, Despite Database Error Saying Otherwise.”   New York Daily News.  28 September 2017.

mandalay-bay-guard-clinton-foundation

mandalay-bay-guard-clinton-foundation

Bethania Palma

Mandalay Bay security guard Jesus Campos worked in the Clinton Foundation's Las Vegas office before the mass shooting.

In mid-October 2017, the satirical web site FreedumJunkshun posted an article apparently aiming to take in “truthers” and paranoid Clinton-watchers, reporting that wounded Mandalay Bay security guard Jesus Campos had not only “vanished,” but that he had worked for the Clinton Foundation’s Las Vegas office. Citing a fabricated quote attributed Fox News, FreedumJunkshun stated: < Then there’s this tidbit from Fox News. It’s two sentences, but they’re very interesting sentences: Until last month, Campos worked a second job at the Clinton Foundation’s Las Vegas office where he had been providing security services for more than five years. He resigned suddenly just before the attacks. > Under FreedomJunkshun’s “about” section, the web site clearly indicates is not intended to be taken seriously: < We believe that there is nothing more precious than the mind of an aging conservative. Here we gather a boatload of bullhonkey, works of pure satirical fiction, to give the fist-shakers of the world a reason to hate. Reality is often in the eye of the beholder. You won’t find any of it here. Join the fun in the comments on our Facebook page where you too can watch David Hasselhoff running over someone’s poodle magically transformed into a crime against humanity by Barack Obama or yet another murder the Clintons got away with. > We confirmed with the Clinton Foundation that they have no office in Las Vegas, and no current or past employees named Jesus Campos. Campos accidentally attracted the addled obsession of conspiracy theorists when he was shot in the leg while inspecting a reported open door on the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino on 1 October 2017. He was wounded in a hail of gunfire when mass shooter Stephen Paddock turned his weapon on the hallway before raining bullets down on a country music festival crowd of 22,000 below. Campos has been credited as a hero for his life-saving actions that night, which included warning a building engineer and a hotel guest to take cover, and helping police despite his injury until they ordered him to seek medical care. However his high-profile role in a mass shooting has inevitably resulted in intense scrutiny from a demented segment of the U.S. population known as “truthers,’ who believe every large-scale tragedy is engineered by the government to facilitate that take-over of the New World Order. It’s an all-encompassing and deeply anti-Semitic conspiracy theory, made popular by the likes of occasionally–clothed, chair-hurling InfoWars conspiracy troll Alex Jones. Since the mass shooting in which Paddock killed 58 people and wounded hundreds, Campos has been the target of much delusional speculation, including false allegations that he was an “accomplice” to Paddock and had been arrested, or that he had “gone missing” after cancelling a series of media interviews to seek medical treatment at a walk-in clinic days after being shot. Ending hyperbolic reports he had “vanished” while attempting to maintain a low profile, the soft-spoken Campos appeared on Ellen Degeneres’ NBC talk show on 18 October 2017 alongside building engineer Stephen Schuck. The men recounted their narrow escape from death and said they were trying to heal after the trauma they experienced.

Mannington, Butch.  “Missing Vegas Security Guard on Clinton Foundation Payroll.”   FreedumJunkshun.com.  17 October 2017.;Pearce, Matt.  “Wounded Casino Security Guard Vanishes from Las Vegas — And Surfaces on the Set of ‘Ellen.'”   Los Angeles Times.  17 October 2017.;Lawrence, Christopher.  “‘Ellen’ Producers Mum on How They Landed Jesus Campos Interview.”   Las Vegas Review-Journal.  18 October 2017.

must-nfl-players-stand

must-nfl-players-stand

David Mikkelson

The NFL's rulebook contains a regulation specifically requiring players to stand on the sideline during the pre-game playing of the U.S. national anthem.

Partway into the 2017 NFL season, the practice begun by San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick during the previous year’s exhibition season — of kneeling on the sidelines (rather than standing) during the playing of the U.S. national anthem before games in order to symbolize opposition to racial injustice in America — had become widespread around the league. Many players — and some whole teams — had similarly started “taking a knee” on the sidelines, or staying in the locker room, while pre-game renditions of “The Star-Spangled Banner” were played in football stadiums. The protest gained momentum after United States President Donald Trump issued comments prior to the NFL’s Week 3 schedule suggesting that football players who declined to stand during the national anthem should be fined, that fans should boycott games, and that the league should alter their policy to force players to stand during pre-game ceremonies: < If a player wants the privilege of making millions of dollars in the NFL,or other leagues, he or she should not be allowed to disrespect…. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 23, 2017 > < …our Great American Flag (or Country) and should stand for the National Anthem. If not, YOU’RE FIRED. Find something else to do! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 23, 2017 > < Sports fans should never condone players that do not stand proud for their National Anthem or their Country. NFL should change policy! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) September 24, 2017 > During that weekend’s games, an item began circulating via social media proclaiming that the NFL League Rulebook specifically required that all players must be on the sideline during the playing of the national anthem, and that “failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s)”: < The specific rule pertaining to the national anthem is found on pages A62-63 of the NFL League Rulebook. It states: ‘The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition … It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.’ > However, no such wording appears in the 2017 version of the Official Playing Rules of the National Football League (which the NFL also sometimes refers to as an “operations manual”): Pages 62 and 63 contain only regulations about the enforcement of fouls committed on the field during gameplay, and nowhere else does that document specify anything about the either the playing of the national anthem prior to games or the required behavior of players and team personnel during that ceremony. In fact, the rulebook makes no mention of the national anthem at all. Rule 4, which covers Game Timing, states only that both teams must be on the field before the scheduled start time of the first and second halves, and must initially appear on the field at least 10 minutes early in order to allow sufficient time for warming up: < Both teams must be on the field to kick off at the scheduled time for the start of each half. Prior to the start of the game, both teams are required to appear on the field at least 10 minutes prior to the scheduled kickoff in order to ensure sufficient time for proper warm-up. Designated members of the officiating crew must notify both head coaches personally of the scheduled time for kickoff prior to the start of each half. > Rule 5, which covers Players, Substitutes, Equipment, and General Rules, does include (in Article 8) a section prohibiting players from “conveying personal messages” throughout the game day while they are visible to fans in attendance and television audiences, and from “convey[ing] messages, through helmet decals, arm bands, jersey patches, or other items affixed to game uniforms or equipment, which relate to political activities or causes …”: < Throughout the period on game-day that a player is visible to the stadium and television audience (including in pregame warm-ups, in the bench area, and during postgame interviews in the locker room or on the field), players are prohibited from wearing, displaying, or otherwise conveying personal messages either in writing or illustration, unless such message has been approved in advance by the League office. Items to celebrate anniversaries or memorable events, or to honor or commemorate individuals, such as helmet decals, and arm bands and jersey patches on players’ uniforms, are prohibited unless approved in advance by the League office. All such items approved by the League office, if any, must relate to team or League events or personages. The League will not grant permission for any club or player to wear, display, or otherwise convey messages, through helmet decals, arm bands, jersey patches, or other items affixed to game uniforms or equipment, which relate to political activities or causes, other non-football events, causes or campaigns, or charitable causes or campaigns. Further, any such approved items must be modest in size, tasteful, non-commercial, and noncontroversial; must not be worn for more than one football season; and if approved for use by a specific team, must not be worn by players on other teams in the League. > However, some sources have confusingly stated that the NFL has a separate game operations manual distributed to all the teams, and it is that document, not the rulebook, which supposedly includes the wording in question regarding player conduct during the national anthem: < It’s important to know that NFL football games are governed by multiple codes of conduct. One is the NFL rulebook; another is the NFL game operations manual. The rulebook is concerned with in-game actions by players and coaches (like scoring, penalties, challenges and so on), whereas the game-operations manual dictates how NFL games should be run in the bigger-picture organizational sense. “The league’s Game Operations Department uses the manual to govern the conduct of home clubs, to ensure they protect players and provide the conditions for a fair and fan-friendly contest,” reads the NFL’s website. “Clubs face warnings and other penalties for noncompliance.” The NFL rulebook makes no mention of the national anthem. But the game operations manual does. Here’s what the game operations manual says regarding the national anthem, according to an NFL spokesperson: ‘The National Anthem must be played prior to every NFL game, and all players must be on the sideline for the National Anthem. ‘During the National Anthem, players on the field and bench area should stand at attention, face the flag, hold helmets in their left hand, and refrain from talking. The home team should ensure that the American flag is in good condition. It should be pointed out to players and coaches that we continue to be judged by the public in this area of respect for the flag and our country. Failure to be on the field by the start of the National Anthem may result in discipline, such as fines, suspensions, and/or the forfeiture of draft choice(s) for violations of the above, including first offenses.’ > We have not yet been able to independently confirm the existence and wording of this second document (the NFL has not responded to our query), but the proffered wording — which league spokesman Brian McCarthy described as a “policy” rather than a “rule” — states that players must “be” on the sideline for the national anthem, not that they must “stand” on the sideline (the latter is listed only as something players “should” do). The wording also establishes that players “may” (not “shall”) be penalized for not observing the regulation, and indeed the NFL announced that they would not take any disciplinary measures over players’ remaining in the locker room before Week 3 games: < The NFL will not discipline those teams and players who refused to be on the field for the playing of the national anthem before games Sunday, league spokesman Joe Lockhart said. “There will be no discipline handed down this week,” Lockhart, the NFL’s executive vice president of communications and public affairs, said in a conference call with reporters. The Pittsburgh Steelers, Seattle Seahawks and Tennessee Titans were not on the field for the anthem. > When Colin Kaepernick first made waves by kneeling during pre-game ceremonies back in August 2016, the NFL issued a statement proclaiming that “Players are encouraged but not required to stand during the playing of the National Anthem.” NBC News similarly observed that “The NFL has no such rule, and the Collective Bargaining Agreement is silent on the subject.” Nonetheless, could Article 8, Rule 5 of the rulebook itself be interpreted as requiring NFL players to stand on the sidelines during the national anthem? The latter part of it would not seem to apply, as players who kneel or remain in the locker room during the playing of “The Star-Spangled Banner” are not wearing, or affixing to their uniforms, any symbols related to their protest. The first part seemingly provides league officials broad latitude to determine what constitutes a “personal message,” but as James Dator noted in addressing this issue on SBNATION, it’s unlikely that section could or would be applied to the current protests: < Despite claims over what is or isn’t “acceptable,” none of them hold weight. Potential disciplinary action over how players act during the anthem would need to be in place under the collective bargaining agreement with the NFLPA, and to make matters more complicated, several states that have teams also extend first-amendment protection to employees of private businesses while at work. >

Dator, James.  “Are NFL Players Required to Be on the Field for the National Anthem?”   SBNation.  24 September 2017.;Scholes, Ty.  “Are NFL Football Players Required to Stand for the National Anthem?”   WXIA-TV [Atlanta]  24 September 2017.;Florio, Mike.  “NFL: Players Are Encouraged But Not Required to Stand for National Anthem.”   NBC Sports.  27 August 2016.;Fitzpatrick, Alex.  “Does the NFL Require Players to Stand for the National Anthem?”   Time.  25 September 2017.;Boren, Cindy.  “Steelers’ Mike Tomlin Says Team Won’t Take the Field for Anthem.”   The Washington Post.  24 September 2017.;Maske, Mark.  “No Discipline for Anthem-Skipping Teams as NFL Fires Back at Trump.”   The Washington Post.  25 September 2017.;Carter, Allison.  “What the NFL Policy Book Says About the National Anthem.”   IndyStar.com.  25 September 2017.

trump-hotel-anti-cnn-petitions

trump-hotel-anti-cnn-petitions

The Trump International Hotel in Washington D.C. handed out flyers promoting an anti-CNN petition to guests at check-in.

Donald Trump’s well-documented hatred for CNN fed a rumor in October 2017 that, upon checking at his Washington, D.C. hotel, guests were being asked to sign a petition against showing the news network on TVs in federal buildings.   This rumor appears to have originated from a single Facebook post that has either been deleted or made private. On 10 October 2017, Twitter user @ackrantz11 posted a screenshot purportedly showing the original post and claimed that a “friend” had received the flyer when she checked in to the Trump Hotel: We identified and interviewed the woman pictured in this Facebook post. She told us that she was never actually a guest at the Trump Hotel in Washington D.C. She did, however, use Facebook’s “check in” feature when she stopped in for a few drinks at the lobby bar. While she was there, an anonymous person handed her the flyer. She said: < There’s been a lot of misinformation about this. I did not stay at the hotel. I was there for drinks at the lobby bar. These flyers were being passed out. I have no idea who gave it to me. I don’t know if it was a staff member or not. Other people were handed the flyer in the bar. At first, I didn’t read it because I was talking to someone. I’m not a Trump supporter and after I read it I posted it on fb. This has gotten blown out of proportion a little bit. > The original Facebook post did not claim that hotel staff had handed out the flyer or that every guest received it at check-in. Yet, as the image spread on social media, the claim was exaggerated.  The original Facebook poster also told us that she did not know Twitter user @ackrantz11, whose tweet pushing this rumor garnered more than 10,000 retweets: < No idea who this person is. My friend posted something similar. I think this person just copied it. I think they assumed when I “checked in” on fb I was checking in to the hotel. This person sure seems to answer a lot of questions about my stay though! > When we asked a spokesperson for the hotel whether guests were receiving the fliers at check-in, we were told: < We have no knowledge of this and it is not true. > This flyer does detail a real petition on WhiteHouse.gov (it has just over 50 signatures as of this writing). Anyone can create a WhiteHouse.gov petition. Finally, if the petition was indeed being handed to every guest at the hotel (or even every customer at the lobby bar), it would likely have been posted multiple times. Yet we have only come across a single image of the document, indicating that this was likely an isolated incident.Â

miranda-cosgrove-arrested-prostitution

miranda-cosgrove-arrested-prostitution

Actress Miranda Cosgrove was arrested for prostitution in July 2017.

A video reporting that actress Miranda Cosgrove had been arrested for prostitution was widely circulated on social media in July 2017: < iCarly child star MIRANDA COSGROVE has been ARRESTED for prostitution pic.twitter.com/pk9y9Y8ycP — NotThis News (@NotThisUS) July 14, 2017 > Cosgrove was not arrested in mid-2017, for prostitution or any other infraction. The NotThis News Twitter account is a “parody” of NowThis News, a media company that primarily distributes their own news videos through social media. NotThis News uses a near-copy of the legitimate NowThis News company’s logo: The NotThis News parody account carries a small disclaimer identifying it as a spoof. Yet in both the videos that had been posted to their Twitter feed as of this writing, they used the real NowThis News logo, making it appear as if it their parody video originated with the genuine NowThis News site: The fake Cosgrove news video also used what appear to be TMZ and Al Jazeera graphics to make the report seem more believable. And the salacious subtitles in the video, in which a woman purported to be Cosgrove propositions someone in a Mercedes, do not match the audio. An unreliable Facebook page also picked up the false story. Needless to say, if Miranda Cosgrove actually had been arrested for prostitution, that event would have been reported as national news. Â

texas-harvey-israel

texas-harvey-israel

As of October 2017, would-be recipients of a repair grant from Dickinson, Texas, must promise not to boycott Israel.

With communities in Texas attempting to recover and rebuild from the devastating effects of Hurricane Harvey in late 2017, an administrative measure taken by one Texas city has attracted national attention. Texas Monthly reported: < The city of Dickinson, in Galveston County, was among the hardest-hit places when Hurricane Harvey’s torrential rains slammed Texas. Residents now seeking Harvey relief face a strange ultimatum: agree not to boycott Israel, or your application for aid will be denied. > The Houston Chronicle wrote: < A recently passed state law prohibits Texas governmental entities — including cities — from contracting with or investing certain public funds in companies that boycott Israel. “Anti-Israel policies are anti-Texas policies, and we will not tolerate such actions against an important ally,” Gov. Greg Abbott said in a news release earlier this year. Dickinson’s application for aid to rebuild homes and businesses requires residents to state that they will not boycott Israel during the term of the agreement, according to a form on the city’s website. > We received several inquiries from readers wondering about the veracity of these reports. As of 24 October 2017, the city of Dickinson, Texas, does indeed require anyone applying for a Hurricane Harvey Repair Grant to promise not to boycott Israel. Those seeking a grant are required to sign an agreement with the city of Dickinson “for the purpose of providing funds to assist in rebuilding a home or a business impacted by Hurricane Harvey within the City in a timely manner that will maintain the City’s ad valorem and sales tax revenues, along with other benefits for the City as a whole.” One of the terms of the application is: < 11. Verification not to Boycott Israel. By executing this Agreement below, the Applicant verifies that the Applicant: (1) does not boycott Israel; and (2) will not boycott Israel during the term of this Agreement. > Dickinson Mayor Julie Masters told local TV news channel KHOU that the city was required to include that condition on the release of the funding by a recently-passed Texas state law – House Bill 89, which Governor Greg Abbott signed in May, and which came into effect on 1 September 2017. The law states: < A governmental entity may not enter into a contract with a company for goods or services unless the contract contains a written verification from the company that it: Does not boycott Israel; and will not boycott Israel during the term of the contract. > Speaking to KHOU, Mayor Masters said: < We had to include that verbiage [from] that statute that was required in that statute…We’re just the messenger – don’t crucify us. We’re just following state law. > H.B. 89 does not appear to require that any release of public funds come with a commitment by the recipient not to boycott Israel. Rather, it states that Texas (or cities and towns within Texas) cannot enter into a contract with anyone “for goods or services” without adding the “no boycott” clause. Under Dickinson’s “repair grant application and agreement,” the city would “provide financial assistance directly” to the recipient for the purpose of repairing and rebuilding private homes and businesses. So it’s unclear how the city receives “goods or services” in return for the grant. However, the agreement also defines the grant recipient as an “independent contractor.” According to KHOU, Masters is set to consult with Texas state officials over the wording of the law. The American Civil Liberties Union has criticized both the Dickinson agreement and the state law, saying it was “reminiscent of McCarthy-era loyalty oaths.” In a statement, ACLU of Texas Legal Director Andre Segura said: < The First Amendment protects Americans’ right to boycott, and the government cannot condition hurricane relief or any other public benefit on a commitment to refrain from protected political expression. >

Reigstad, Leif.  “Dickinson Residents Must Take Stance on Israel to Get Harvey Relief.”   Texas Monthly.  20 October 2017.;Lewis, Brooke A. and Margaret Kadifa.  “Dickinson Demands Hurricane Harvey Victims Agree to Not Boycott Israel.”   Houston Chronicle.  22 October 2017.;City of Dickinson, Texas.  “Hurricane Harvey Repair Grant Application and Agreement.”   Unknown publication date.;Chapin, Josh.  “City of Dickinson Defends Harvey Relief Requirement Regarding Israel.”   KHOU-TV.  20 October 2017.;King, Phil.  “House Bill No. 89.”   Texas State Legislature.  2 May 2017.;ACLU of Texas.  “Texas City Tells People no Hurricane Harvey Aid Unless They Promise Not to Boycott Israel.”  &nbsp 20 October 2017.

trump-disgrace-world-girl

trump-disgrace-world-girl

A video shows a little girl calling President Trump 'a disgrace to the world.'

A short clip purportedly showing a young girl calling President Trump a “disgrace to the world” racked up more than 175,000 retweets after it was posted by @Najahta to Twitter on 7 May 2017: < who is she ?? pic.twitter.com/amElWRGFdp — najahta (@najahtaa) May 7, 2017 > Many people shared and responded to this video as if it depicted a genuine incident between the President of the United States and a young girl: < Little Girl To Trump: You´re A Disgrace To The World https://t.co/JWsgCwQKv9 vía @YouTube — Clemente García (@Clegartec) May 8, 2017 > However, the interaction actually comes from “The President’s Show,” a Comedy Central series starring actor Anthony Atamanuik as President Trump. The scene comes at the 1:30 mark of the following video: < @najahtaa I’m the guy playing Trump from the @PresidentShow and that little girl was brave, funny and smart. Also, she said that if her own volition. — Anthony Atamanuik (@TonyAtamanuik) May 7, 2017 > Â

george-washington-historic-church-plaque

george-washington-historic-church-plaque

Christ Church in Alexandria, Virginia, is "ripping out" a plaque dedicated to George Washington because it might offend people.

MOSTLY FALSE

In late October 2017, several blog posts and news articles reported that Christ Church in Alexandria, Virginia was purportedly “ripping out” plaques dedicated to George Washington because it “offends” people. The Washington Times covered the claim on 27 October 2017, and the following day, Daily Caller reported: < Christ Church in Alexandria, Va., where Washington became a founding member in 1773, will remove his memorial and a similar one to Robert E. Lee, the Washington Times reported. Church leaders say the memorials, which sit to the left and right of the altar, have become too divisive and might be discouraging parishioners from attending services. “The plaques in our sanctuary make some in our presence feel unsafe or unwelcome,” the church leaders said, according to the Washington Times. “Some visitors and guests who worship with us choose not to return because they receive an unintended message from the prominent presence of the plaques.” > Stories mentioned the removal of a plaque dedicated to Robert E. Lee as something of a side note, with the Washington plaque’s removal taking center stage. But a 29 October 2017 Alexandria Times piece reported that the decision appeared to originally have been predicated on the Lee plaque: < The email said that, since both plaques were erected in 1870, they considered them together. “The Vestry believes that the memorial plaques to George Washington and Robert E. Lee should be considered together,” the email read. “The plaques were erected at the same time. They visually balance each other, maintaining the symmetry of our sanctuary. The men they memorialize are giants in our nation and were members of this parish. Robert E. Lee has taken an outsized symbolism in the national conversation about race and inclusion.” > The Alexandria Times also included a link to an e-mail announcing the decision [PDF, archive], and portions omitted from reports noted that the decision appeared to hinge entirely on the Lee plaque:  < Today, the legacy of slavery and of the Confederacy is understood differently than it was in 1870. For some, Lee symbolizes the attempt to overthrow the Union and to preserve slavery. Today our country is trying once again to come to grips with the history of slavery and the subsequent disenfranchisement of people of color. […] The plaques in our sanctuary make some in our presence feel unsafe or unwelcome. Some visitors and guests who worship with us choose not to return because they receive an unintended message from the prominent presence of the plaques. > Although some news outlets reported that Christ Church in Alexandria planned to remove the Washington plaque because it might “offend” people, information obtained directly from its lengthy statement makes it clear that the Washington plaque’s removal was because of its placement. The church stated that both plaques would be removed to a prominent location, “fully visible to parishioners and tourists alike.” Framing the decision on the concept that a plaque dedicated to George Washington offended parishioners misconstrues the church’s lengthy announcement explaining it was due to Lee’s place in history, and evolving views of the Confederacy. We contacted a representative for Alexandria’s Christ Church, but have not yet received a response.

Dinan, Stephen.  “George Washington’s Church To Tear Down Memorial Honoring First President.”   Washington Times.  27 October 2017.;Epitropoulos, Alexa.  “Christ Church Announces Plans To Relocate Washington, Lee Plaques.”   Alexandria Times.  29 October 2017.;Racke, Will.  “George Washington’s Church Is Going To Rip Out His Memorial.”   Daily Caller.  28 October 2017.;Fox News Insider.  “George Washington’s Church Says Plaque Honoring First President Must Come Down.”   28 October 2017.

muslim-figure-pork-free

muslim-figure-pork-free

A 'Muslim figure' threatened to leave the U.S. unless they were provided pork-free menus.

On 1 July 2017, dubious web site AllNews4US.com posted a story based around a claim that a “Muslim figure” threatened to leave the United States. The story did not name the figure or elaborate on any details that indicated that it might have any truth to it whatsoever, but despite that detail (and being nearly incoherent), the story was picked up and subsequently further spread by several other dubious, clickbaity sites with names such as “Freedom Writers“, “USA Life Buzz“, and “World Source Media“. There is no mention of a “Muslim figure” in the story itself, but it does include a picture taken from a November 2016 interview with a Muslim woman: Fusion correspondent Alaa Basatneh. Other variations of the story use a picture taken from a June 2015 CNN interview with another Muslim woman, Tahera Ahmad, the director of interfaith engagement at Northwestern University, while others use a stock image of a Muslim woman, but never is the “Muslim figure” named. The article, such as it is, actually is a misrepresentation of an actual news story out of France, but it does not make mention of any specific actions in the United States: < Muslim migrants have turned into a worldwide issue, and the circumstance deteriorates each day. Our nation has had a considerable measure of Muslim-related issues of late, yet this time settlers went too far. President Donald Trump had the ideal answer for the issue forced by outsiders, however Democrats didn’t bolster him. You won’t think about what occurred next… > The story does contain a reference to President Donald Trump’s ban against travel into the U.S. from several countries with large Muslim populations, calling it an “ideal answer”.  Then it shifts gears and highlights Michel Rotger — conservative mayor of the French city of Chevigny-Saint Sauveur — and his purported decision to ban any school menu that excludes pork.  That story was first reported by the French magazine L’Express, but still makes no mention of anything related to the United States. The story also mentions a man identified as Paul Garrigue, who opposes the mayor’s move. Garrigue is described as the “president of a group of about ten associations, including the League of Human Rights and Amnesty International.” But he is not identified as a Muslim or a spokesperson for any Muslim-affiliated group. Garrigue is listed as a member of the League of Human Rights’ central committee. Stories about pork bans (or “bowing to Sharia law”) are a popular trope in certain corners of the fake news ecosystem.  This particular story bears a more-than-passing resemblance to articles and rumors from 2014 about a mayor in Ath, Belgium who refused to allow halal cafeterias. That story, like this one, turned out to be a complete hoax.Â

L’Express.   “Pork in the canteen: a mayor of Côte-d’Or ends the alternative menus.”   27 June 2017.;CNN.   “Muslim Woman Claims Discrimination on United Flight.”  2 June 2015.;Richmond, Kait.   “Muslim Woman: I Don’t Feel Safe in US Wearing a Headscarf.”   CNN.  16 November 2016.

trump-pendejo-posters-puerto-rico

trump-pendejo-posters-puerto-rico

A poster calling Trump a "pendejo" has been posted "all over" Puerto Rico.

Resentment toward President Donald Trump’s treatment of Latino communities resurfaced again when an image began circulating online of a poster purportedly “all over” Puerto Rico to coincide with the president’s October 2017 visit there. The image shows a white poster with Trump’s face atop the word “PENDEJO” — a Spanish-language slang term for an idiot. Some variations of the picture include the caption: < PUERTO RICO SALUTES TRUMP … THESE ARE POSTED ALL OVER THE ISLAND … > The president received harsh criticism for his response to Hurricane Maria, which devastated the island in September 2017. Following his visit to Puerto Rico on 3 October 2017, during which he was seen throwing paper towels into a crowd of people, Carmen Yulín Cruz, mayor of the capital city of San Juan, said: < The terrible and abominable view of him throwing paper towels and throwing provisions of people, it does not embody the spirit of the American nation. > However, the “pendejo” photograph does not contain any information identifying it as having been taken in Puerto Rico. According to the Puerto Rican government, only 10 percent of Puerto Rican Electric Power Authority customers (PREPA) had electricity restored as of 6 October 2017, so it is unclear who could make and distribute a poster “all over” the territory. We are also skeptical that as Puerto Ricans face an uncertain future with a scarcity of food, water, electricity, and phone service, they have the resources and energy to launch an island-wide “pendejo” poster campaign. If the image was taken on the island territory, and if there are indeed “pendejo” posters all over the island, it would not be surprising if they predate both the hurricane and Trump’s visit. Snake Hawk Press, which is based out of San Antonio, Texas, has been selling the posters since at least September 2016 (and currently offers both a print and a t-shirt). The studio’s owner, Cruz Ortiz, also created artwork for Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton’s campaign. T-shirt retailer Crazy Saguaro Tees also sells a shirt with the image. Crazy Saguaro Tees told us that they did not create the image. We reached out to Snake Hawk Press seeking comment, but did not receive a response by press time. Calling Trump a “pendejo” is not exactly a novel idea. Shortly after he announced his candidacy for the Republican presidential nomination in June 2015, a Guatemala-based company, Ilegal Mezcal, circulated posters in various U.S. cities with a picture of Trump’s head alongside the message: < DONALD ERES UN PENDEJO FROM ILEGAL MEZCAL > This photograph was taken by a Snopes staff member in Washington, DC, in September 2016: Ilegal Mezcal founder John Rexer said in 2015: < We’re putting them up as long as Trump continues to be an ass. So probably we’ll be doing it for a while. > After Trump pardoned former Maricopa County Sheriff Joe Arpaio on 25 August 2017 from a conviction for racially profiling Latinos in defiance of a federal judge’s order, former Secretary of Housing and Urban Development Julián Castro responded to Trump’s decision on Twitter saying: < Trump in one word tonight: #pendejo > Trump campaigned for the presidency on the promise that he would build a “wall” between the United States and Mexico. While announcing his candidacy on 16 June 2015 he said: < When Mexico sends its people, they’re not sending their best. They’re not sending you. They’re not sending you. They’re sending people that have lots of problems, and they’re bringing those problems with us. They’re bringing drugs. They’re bringing crime. They’re rapists. And some, I assume, are good people. >

Signer, Rachel. “Ilegal Mezcal Is Plastering Buildings With Anti-Donald Trump Propaganda.” Eater. 31 July 2015.;Hirschfield Davis, Julie and Habermann, Maggie. “Trump Pardons Joe Arpaio, Who Became Face of Crackdown on Illegal Immigration.” New York Times. 25 August 2017.;Lilley, Sandra and Herrera, Guadalupe. “‘I Would Not Have Done That’: Puerto Rico Officials React to Trump Visit.” NBC News. 4 October 2017.;The Washington Post. “Full text: Donald Trump Announces a Presidential Bid.” 16 June 2015.;Silva, Elda. “Clinton Campaign Taps San Antonio Artist Cruz Ortiz.” San Antonio Express-News. 15 October 2016.

seth-rich-dnc-wikileaks-murder

seth-rich-dnc-wikileaks-murder

Bethania Palma

DNC staffer Seth Rich sent 'thousands of leaked e-mails' to WikiLeaks before he was murdered.

On 16 May 2017, Fox News published an explosive report linking the death of murdered Democratic National Committee staffer Seth Rich to tens of thousands of e-mails allegedly found on his laptop computer. Fox reported that the e-mails were internal Democratic National Committee messages Rich transferred to Gavin McFayden, a now-deceased investigative journalist, who then sent them to the document-dumping web site WikiLeaks. The Fox report claimed that there was a conspiracy between the local police department, the Federal Bureau of Investigation, and the D.C. mayor’s office to cover up the investigation: < An FBI forensic report of Rich’s computer — generated within 96 hours after Rich’s murder — showed he made contact with WikiLeaks through Gavin MacFadyen, a now-deceased American investigative reporter, documentary filmmaker, and director of WikiLeaks who was living in London at the time, the federal source told Fox News. “I have seen and read the emails between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” the federal investigator told Fox News, confirming the MacFadyen connection. He said the emails are in possession of the FBI, while the stalled case is in the hands of the Washington Police Department. The revelation is consistent with the findings of Wheeler, whose private investigation firm was hired by a third party on behalf of Rich’s family to probe the case. “My investigation up to this point shows there was some degree of email exchange between Seth Rich and WikiLeaks,” Wheeler said. “I do believe that the answers to who murdered Seth Rich sits on his computer on a shelf at the DC police or FBI headquarters.” The federal investigator, who requested anonymity, said 44,053 emails and 17,761 attachments between Democratic National Committee leaders, spanning from January 2015 through late May 2016, were transferred from Rich to MacFadyen before May 21. > Rich, a 27-year-old DNC staffer, was shot twice in the back at 4:20 in the morning on 10 July 2016 amid the run-up to the presidential election. Although none of his possessions were taken from him, Washington D.C. Metropolitan Police consider it a botched robbery attempt, because there had been a spate of muggings in Rich’s Bloomingdale neighborhood at the time. Almost two weeks later, on 22 July 2016, WikiLeaks dumped a load of hacked e-mails that would embarrass the DNC and create a media frenzy in the months before the election. The timing of the incidents, as well as Rich’s employment at the DNC, led to conspiracy theories tying his death to the leak. Adding to the confusion, WikiLeaks offered a $20,000 reward for information leading to the conviction of Rich’s killer. Since his death, Rich’s family has consistently denied rumors linking him to WikiLeaks. The Fox News story about Rich came one day after a report by the Washington Post accused President Donald Trump of spilling classified information to Russian envoys during their visit to the Oval Office on 10 May 2017. Brad Bauman, a spokesperson for Rich’s family, told us he believed the Fox story was motivated by a desire to deflect attention away from the Post report: < I think there’s a very special place in hell for people that would use the memory of a murder victim in order to pursue a political agenda. > The Fox story uses two sources: Rod Wheeler, a Fox News contributor characterized as a private investigator in the article, and an unnamed “federal investigator.” On 15 May 2017, Wheeler speculated to local news outlet Fox5 that there was critical information on a computer that belonged to him, which was either in the possession of the FBI or MPD: < The police department nor the FBI have been forthcoming. They haven’t been cooperating at all. I believe that the answer to solving his death lies on that computer which I believe is either at the police department or at the FBI. I’ve been told both. > Wheeler claimed to have a source at the FBI that “confirmed” Rich was linked to WikiLeaks, and a source inside the police department who told him MPD was told to “stand down” from the investigation. In a follow-up interview on Fox News, Wheeler implied that a conspiracy reaching to the highest levels of the city’s government was at work: < I want to find out who caused that man’s death so we can put them behind bars. But if there’s somebody in politics, if there’s somebody in government, whether it’s the mayor’s office or anywhere else in this city that’s involved, you better believe they’re going to be dragged in and questioned. > We were able to confirm the FBI is not investigating Rich’s murder — it is an MPD investigation. We reached out to Wheeler by e-mail and have yet to receive a response, but since the Fox story was published, he has been quoted in several news articles recanting his original story. He told BuzzFeed News the following day, “That story on Fox 5 last night was inaccurate. I don’t even know where the computers are.” On 19 May 2017, the Rich family attorney sent Wheeler a cease and desist letter saying he had violated a contract forbidding him to publicly disclose information about the case and threatening to sue if he continues to do so. We contacted the office of Washington D.C. Mayor Muriel Bowser to ask if there was a lurid connection between the mayor, the DNC, and Rich’s death, and got a flat denial from spokesman Kevin Harris: < All claims made by Mr. Wheeler are false and take fake news to a whole new level. The family deserves better and everyday MPD continues to work diligently to solve this case. > We also asked the police department about Wheeler’s claims that the department was stepping back from the investigation. A spokesperson for the department denied it and said that the investigation remains active: < The assertions put forward by Mr. Wheeler are unfounded. The Metropolitan Police Department’s (MPD) Homicide Branch is actively investigating Mr. Rich’s murder and we continue to work with the family to bring closure to this case as we do with all homicide investigations. If there are any individuals who feel they have information, we urge them to call us at 202-727-9099 or text us at 50411. The department is offering a reward of up to $25,000 for information on this case that leads to the arrest and conviction of the person or persons responsible. > Bauman said in a statement that Wheeler was not authorized to speak on behalf of the family, and added the family only learned of the new round of accusations through news reports: < Even if tomorrow, an e-mail was found, it is not a high enough bar of evidence to prove any interactions, as e-mails can be altered and we’ve seen that those interested in pushing conspiracies will stop at nothing to do so. We are a family who is committed to facts, not fake evidence that surfaces every few months to fill the void and distract law enforcement and the general public from finding Seth’s murderers. The services of the private investigator who spoke to press was offered to the Rich family and paid for by a third party, and contractually was barred from speaking to press or anyone outside of law enforcement or the family, unless explicitly authorized by the family. > McFayden, an investigative journalist who was an early defender of WikiLeaks, died in October 2016 after a battle with lung cancer. Although the Fox report claims Wheeler is a private investigator, a search for Wheeler’s name on the public lookup tool for licenses in Washington D.C. yields no results. We also checked for a license under his name in Maryland, where his firm Capitol Investigations is based. This search also yielded no results. When we asked MPD whether he was indeed a homicide detective with the department, they only confirmed he once worked there starting in 1990. He was dismissed by the department in 1995, but a spokesman did not explain why. We sent an e-mail to Wheeler through his firm and have not yet received a response. NBC News identified the “third party” who hired Wheeler to investigate Rich’s murder as Ed Butowsky, a Dallas-based financial adviser, who is also a Fox News contributor.

Zimmerman, Malia. “Family of Slain DNC Staffer Seth Rich Blasts Detective Over Report of WikiLeaks.”   Fox News. 16 May 2017.;Miller, Greg, and Jaffe, Greg. “Trump Revealed Highly Classified Information to Russian Foreign Minister and Ambassador.”   The Washington Post. 15 May 2017.;Marraco, Marina. “Family’s Private investigator: There Is Evidence Seth Rich Had Contact With WikiLeaks Prior to Death.”   Fox5. 15 May 2017.;Seitz-Wald, Alex. “DNC Staffer’s Murder Draws Fresh Conspiracy Theories.”   NBC News. 16 May 2017.;Hermann, Peter. “Family of Slain Seth Rich Says Reports He Fed WikiLeaks DNC Info Are Untrue.”   The Washington Post. 16 May 2017.;Kludt, Tom. “DNC Employee Shot and Killed in Washington.”   CNN. 11 July 2016.;Roberts, Sam. “Gavin MacFadyen, 76, Mentor and Defender of WikiLeaks Founder, Dies.”   The New York Times. 27 October 2016.;Morton, Joseph. “Parents of DNC Staffer Seth Rich Vow to Find His Killer; Reward Now $125,000.”   Omaha World-Herald. 23 November 2016.;Seitz-Wald, Alex. “Slain DNC Staffer’s Family Orders Blabbing Detective to ‘Cease and Desist.’”   NBC News. 19 May 2017.;Kutner, Max. “FBI Not Probing DNC Staffer Seth Rich’s Murder, Despite WikiLeaks Claim.”   Newsweek. 17 May 2017.;Koerner, Claudia. “The Private Detective Who Ignited a Clinton Conspiracy Theory Says He Was Misquoted.”   BuzzFeed News. 16 May 2017.

cops-take-knee-redskins-stranded-locker-room

cops-take-knee-redskins-stranded-locker-room

The Washington Redskins were stranded in their locker rooms overnight by Philadelphia police angry that players "took a knee" during a game against the Eagles on 23 October 2017.

On 24 October 2017, an article began circulating on Facebook with the claim that law enforcement officers in Philadelphia retaliated against Washington Redskins players who “took a knee” to protest police brutality by refusing escort players from their locker room after a game: < The Washington Redskins allowed 11 of their players to take a knee for the National Anthem … enraging fans and local law enforcement in Philadelphia. After the game, the 14 officers assigned to seeing the team safely to their bus decided to show them the same respect they’re showing our veterans. The men lined up in front of the door, took a knee, put a fist in the air and shouted “Blue Lives Matter!” Then the captain informed them that they were “on their own” and the corp walked out … it wasn’t until after 5 AM when tailgating closes at the stadium that the team was safe enough to start their long-haul back to DC. The Philadelphia Police Department released a statement that those officers are on the stadium payroll during games and therefore not subject to disciplinary action. Stadium officials say the matter will be handled internally. In other words, good job, fellas. Show those entitled brats how things really work. > Although it is true the Redskins played the Eagles in Philadelphia on 23 October 2017, the claim about police “trapping” players in their locker room is completely false. Freedum Junkshun is a fake news site, and a disclaimer displayed on the footer of every page plainly states the purpose of its content: < We believe that there is nothing more precious than the mind of an aging conservative. Here we gather a boatload of bullhonkey, works of pure satirical fiction, to give the fist-shakers of the world a reason to hate. Reality is often in the eye of the beholder. You won’t find any of it here. Join the fun in the comments on our Facebook page where you too can watch David Hasselhoff running over someone’s poodle magically transformed into a crime against humanity by Barack Obama or yet another murder the Clintons got away with. > Its story about the Washington Redskins being punished by Philadelphia police for “taking a knee” is a variation of a previous claim (wildly popular, and also completely untrue) that the New Orleans Saints were similarly stranded when a flight crew did the same, then refused to transport the team after an away game. An image used to illustrate the claim dates back to a September 2016 Philly.com article about a local mosque hosting a breakfast for Philadelphia police officers.

white-supremacist-democrat

white-supremacist-democrat

A man who was either the organizer of the 2017 white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia or the driver of the car that ran down protesters, killing one, is a Democrat who was photographed meeting President Obama in the Oval Office.

On 15 August 2017, the “satirical” web site Our Land of the Free published an article with a headline stating that the white supremacist accused of killing a protester days earlier at a neo-Nazi rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, is a Democrat who visited President Obama in the White House. The author misidentifies the man accused of a fatal vehicular attack in the body of the article, however, confusing him with the rally’s organizer, Jason Kessler: < Conservative author Dinesh D’Souza uncovered something that blows the Left’s whole narrative to bits. While they have been throwing around claims that the white supremacist who ran over a protester who was blocking the road is a Republican, D’Souza discovered he actually an Obama-supporting Democrat. Well, well. The white supremacist organizer of #Charlottesville was an Obama supporter & Occupy Wall Street activist https://t.co/hI5PxNUmb7 — Dinesh D’Souza (@DineshDSouza) August 15, 2017 “Rumors abound on white nationalist forums that Kessler’s ideological pedigree before 2016 was less than pure and seem to point to involvement in the Occupy movement and past support for President Obama,” the Southern Poverty Law Center notes in their profile of Kessler. > To be perfectly clear, the aforementioned Jason Kessler is not the man who drove a car into a group of counter-protesters at the rally, killing one. The person charged with that crime is James Alex Fields, Jr., 20, of Maumee, Ohio. Kessler was the primary organizer of what he described as the “pro-white demonstration” in Charlottesville. Moreover, the photo presented by Our Land of the Free as evidence that Kessler is a Democrat is one of the more ludicrous digital manipulation jobs we’ve encountered in awhile: < Kessler didn’t just support Obama; he visited the Oval Office in 2016. Here’s a photo of the two of them having a fun chat: > As best we can tell, that is accused Charlottesville killer James Fields’ face (not Jason Kessler’s) lamely pasted into the image, but the body doesn’t belong to either of them. We located a copy of the original, unaltered photo, taken by official Obama White House photographer Pete Souza, and found that it documented an Oval Office encounter between President Obama, comedian Will Ferrell, and Ferrell’s wife, Viveca in October 2011: As we observed earlier, Our Land of the Free is a “satire” web site, per this disclaimer found at the bottom of every page of the site: < We believe in the right to be free. No matter what, the freedom to do what we want, say what we want and publish what we want comes first. Therefore we make no guarantee that what you read here is true. In fact, it most definitely is not. Our Land Of The Free is here to entertain you with the kind of whimsical satire conservatives enjoy. > Potentially confusing for inattentive readers will be the fact that some of the untrustworthy sites reposting the article (Patriot USA and News Feed Observer, to name two) carry no such disclaimer. Regardless of where you read it, the story is false.

Bertrand, Natasha.   “Here’s What We Know About the ‘Pro-White’ Organizer of ‘Unite the Right,’ Who Was Chased Out of His Own Press Conference.”    Business Insider.   14 August 2017.;Bromwich, Jonah Engel and Blinder, Alan.   “What We Know About James Alex Fields, Driver Charged in Charlottesville Killing.”    The New York Times.   13 August 2017.;McDevitt, Caitlin.   “Why Will Ferrell Missed Obama’s Fundraiser.”    Politico.   21 February 2012.;Our Land of the Free.   “White Supremacist Who Killed Protester Is a Democrat And Visited Obama In Oval Office.”    15 August 2017.

pastor-eaten-by-crocodiles

pastor-eaten-by-crocodiles

A pastor was eaten by crocodiles in front of horrified parishioners during his attempt to walk on water.

On 14 May 2017, multiple tabloids published claims that a pastor in Zimbabwe was eaten alive by three crocodiles while demonstrating how Jesus walked on water for his congregation: < A Zimbabwean church pastor attempting to demonstrate how Jesus walked on water by crossing a South African river on foot was reportedly eaten alive when he was attacked by three crocodiles. Jonathan Mthethwa of the Saint of the Last Days church in the town of White River Mpumalanga brought his congregation to the area known locally as Crocodile River before attempting his biblical recreation on March 24, local media reports. According to witnesses, the pastor entered the water and waded out approximately 30 metres before attempting to make his way to the surface. Unfortunately for the pastor, three crocodiles are said to have pounced and devoured him. > Despite the fact that there was no reason given in any article for why a pastor and presumably his congregation from Zimbabwe was in South Africa to begin with, not to mention why a pastor would choose to demonstrate walking on water in an area literally called the “Crocodile River,” and the fact that the story bears a striking resemblance to a story from 2016 (all but the names are nearly identical), the story took off all over the world with no substantiating evidence. The 2017 claim first appeared on Zimbabwe Today on 24 March, and was republished on 13 May 2017 by the Daily Post. The Post notes in its disclaimer that information shared on it is unvetted, and should therefore be read with skepticism: < DailyPost publishes news, information, gossip, rumors, conjecture, opinions, and commentary. The site includes both reported and edited content and unmoderated posts and comments containing the personal opinions of readers on a wide range of topics. You should be skeptical of any information on DailyPost, because it may be wrong. > Zimbabwe Today also noted that its material consists of unvetted community submissions: < Zimbabwe Today is an independent online newspaper that showcases all the news from Zimbabwe by Zimbabweans for Zimbabweans across the world. In the spirit of building a new Zimbabwe, we promote and support free speech, hence all the news you will read at Zimbabwe Today is uncensored, unbiased and uncontrolled. Our content is submitted by Zimbabwe community. > Disclaimers notwithstanding, a Google search for “Jonathan Mthethwa” only returned republications of the tale by news outlets, without any proof that Mthethwa existed prior to the claim. Several articles appeared to have been withdrawn within hours of their appearance. The web site Skeptical Science also came up empty-handed while trying to verify basic aspects of the crocodile claim: < We have the name of the pastor, the name of his church, and even a very specific location, so if we google these, what do we find? The first discovery is just how popular the story is, its all over the place. However, beyond this story I can’t find any reference to Pastor Jonathan Mthethwa. OK, so what about the church named “Saint Of The Last Days”. Once again, apart from the story, no references, not one. Churches do like to promote themselves, so the complete lack of any google references is quite odd. However there are many obscure tiny independent groups that do not really get noticed, and so that is not conclusive. > Beyond tabloids, no news sources in Africa or anywhere else reported the story, which did not deter multiple outlets from republishing the claim in May 2017.Â

hillary-clinton-found-dead

hillary-clinton-found-dead

Hillary Clinton was found dead in May 2017.

On 29 May 2017, the Fresh News web site posted a page with the headline “BREAKING: Hillary Clinton Found Dead.” The sub-heading reads “See the report below” and is followed by the music video for Rick Astley’s 1987 global megahit “Never Gonna Give You Up.” If you clicked on the article after seeing the headline, expecting to read a report about the death of the former Secretary of State, you’ve been rickrolled. Hillary Clinton is alive, and gave a public speech two days after this article was published. The Fresh News story is nothing more than a distasteful prank. Â

covfefe-arabic-antediluvian

covfefe-arabic-antediluvian

On 31 May 2017 President Trump send a late-night tweet that began with a complaint about his press coverage and ended with the non-word “covfefe,” baffling many. While “covfefe” jokes proliferated, some began speculating that Trump had not accidentally flubbed the word “coverage,” but instead had been speaking either in code or Arabic. < The #covfefe plot thickens: according to Google Translate, “Cov fe’fe” means سوف فقف “I will stand up” in Arabic. https://t.co/IhIUqQkc4u — Covfefe David Miles (@chrisdavidmiles) June 1, 2017 > However, Google Translate brings up nothing at all for  “covfefe” in Arabic. Only by turning it into two words and adding an apostrophe — cov fe’fe — one can create a phrase that Google Translate says means “I will stand up.” That’s a bit of a stretch — and it’s not even correct, Rasha Sharif, a linguist and language instructor at the DC-based International Center for Language Studies said. Sharif, who is fluent in multiple Arabic dialects, told us by email, “No, the word has nothing to do with the Arabic language.” In fact, Arabic does not use a “V” sound, which already rules out covfefe or cov fe’fe as a word. Sharif says that she does not trust Google Translate, because anyone can edit the translations. “I found many words translated wrong in the Language tools,” she said. So how do you say “I will stand up” in Arabic? The nearest translation of the phrase is sa aqif or سأقف, Sharif told us.  Variations: A separate rumor, this one published by The Marshall Report, held: < Covfefe’ (pronounced “cuv – fee- fae”) is an Antediluvian term for “In the end we win.” It was commonly used by the sons of Adam to rail against the evil actions of the fallen who had led man astray. The term gained popularity prior to the great deluge and was rarely used after the flood subsided. It regained favor around the time Nimrod was building his tower, after which it was entirely lost in translation at Babel. > The term “antediluvian” does not refer to a language, but a Biblical time period before the Flood. Needless to say, the writer, Dianne Marshall offered no proof for her claim. (The Marshall Report frequently uses “satirical” and fake articles as the bases for its posts.) Another rumor, posted to Facebook by one commenter and printed by the web site Godlike Productions held that word came from a Yiddish folktale about a rare butterfly: < A few people have asked me about President’s Trump’s tweet in which he used the word “covfefe.” Most people think he meant to write “coverage” and they have had quite a bit of fun with it, but actually it is a real word of Yiddish origin, meaning “a futile search” or “a pointless and false quest.” It was originally transliterated from the Hebrew as “kabfefe,” whose etymology is “kab”—relating to the mystical Qabalah—and “fefe,” which is a word for “butterfly.” What Trump was actually saying in Yiddish tweet-speak was, “We are doing great things despite the press’s negative and pointless search, aka fake news.” For those who are interested, the idea of “covfefe” comes from an old Yiddish tale about a foolish Sephardi rabbi who believed he was called to find and destroy the mythical and rare butterfly known as Benshariza, or “Lucifer butterfly”—a name that comes from “Helel ben Shahar,” meaning “shining star” (see Isaiah 14:12; also see Ephesians 2:2, where Satan is called the “prince of the power of the air”). The rabbi claimed that the Benshariza was recognizable by a unique and disturbing pattern on its huge wings, which looked like the moon and star symbol of the god Ba’al-Hadad. He was convinced that this ominous creature housed “the spirit of Satan” and that if he could destroy it, he would free the world of evil. > We contacted Ben Kaplan, the Education Administrator at the YIVO Institute for Jewish Research, who told us by email, after consulting with colleagues: < The Yiddish language and literature scholars at the YIVO Institute confirm that “covfefe” is not a Yiddish word.  (However, an anonymous source warns against whispering it three times in the dark, in a mirror, during a full moon.) > Isaac L. Bleaman, a PhD candidate and Yiddish scholar at New York University’s Linguistics Department added: < It is obviously a typo for “coverage.” I see no clear (or even unclear) connection to Yiddish. As for the legend cited, if you Google the string “kabfefe” there are only 45 results and all are either typos, or related to the covfefe incident. Nothing found in Google Books. So chances are it was made up. The only Yiddish word “covfefe” brings to mind is kopveytik ‘headache,’ but that would not make sense in the context of the tweet, and it is not an especially common borrowing into Jewish English. So Trump probably has never heard the word, and certainly wouldn’t use it in his English. We know from Trump’s use of “schlonged” in 2015 (a verb that he took from the Jewish English word for ‘penis’ that ultimately derives from the Yiddish noun shlang ‘snake’) that his use of Yiddish borrowings can be rather idiosyncratic. But I don’t think this is one of those Yiddishisms. I’d sooner look for a Russian connection. > “Covfefe” is not a word, nor is it a Nazi, Israeli, or any other type of acronym. It has no meaning. The President clearly mistyped a tweet, which he later deleted.

maxine-waters-north-korea

maxine-waters-north-korea

Questionable Quotes

Maxine Waters said she fears that Donald Trump would lead the United States into a war, if North Korea launched a nuclear attack.

On 14 August 2017, the right-wing Facebook page Hostility Against Tyranny posted a meme containing the following invented quotation by Democratic Congresswoman Maxine Waters: < My fear is if North Korea nukes us, Trump gonna get us into a war. > Two days later, right-wing web site Overpasses for America reposted the meme on Facebook. As of 18 August 2017, it had been shared more than 73,000 times on Facebook. The quotation is entirely fabricated. The meme does not present a source, and we could find no record of Maxine Waters ever having said this, despite searching the Congressional Record, an archive of her press releases and statements, and Google News. The obvious logical error (after a nuclear attack, the United States would naturally be at war) also indicates that this is no more than a fake quote designed to harm the Congresswoman’s reputation. Maxine Waters has been the target of several previous fake stories and fabricated quotes. This one was likely inspired by a 10 August 2017 interview with the entertainment and gossip web site TMZ, which attracted criticism from some conservatives. The California Congresswoman advocated diplomacy as a solution to the current North Korean crisis, prompting Townhall to report that “Maxine Waters Thinks U.S. Should Give North Korea ‘Things That They’re Asking For.'” (This article was later republished by Fox News.) Although she did open the door to such an outcome, what she actually said was that, in the context of an effort to deescalate tensions and reduce the risk of nuclear war, American diplomats should consider whether it might be possible for North Korea to get certain “things that they’re asking for.” Whether or not you share Maxine Waters’ preference for a negotiated resolution to the current crisis, it’s worth noting that all successful agreements necessarily end with each side getting something they want.

TMZ.  “Congresswoman Maxine Waters: ‘Avoid War With North Korea at All Costs.'”  TMZ.com.  10 August 2017.;Barkoukis, Leah.  “Genius: Maxine Waters Thinks U.S. Should Give North Korea ‘Things That They’re Asking For.'”  Townhall.  11 August 2017.

hurricane-irma-hitting-miami-airport

hurricane-irma-hitting-miami-airport

A video shows Hurricane Irma hitting Miami International Airport.

On 10 September 2017, the White House’s social media director Dan Scavino, Jr. posted several images and videos showing the effects of historically huge Hurricane Irma, which ravaged the Caribbean region before moving up to Florida. One such video purported to show the massive storm hitting Miami International Airport, but is actually of a completely different weather system (Lidia) at a completely different location (Mexico’s Distrito Federal): This video was taken at the Aeropuerto Internacional de la Ciudad de México on 30 August 2017, and it shows the effects of Tropical Storm Lidia, not Hurricane Irma: < VIDEO | La intensa lluvia de esta tarde obligó a suspender vuelos en el Aeropuerto de la Ciudad de México, cortesía @AICM_mx pic.twitter.com/Jx6eD3zHem — La Candente™ México (@LaCandenteMX) August 31, 2017 > (Translation: “The intense rain this afternoon forced the suspension of flights at the Mexico City Airport, courtesy @AICM_mx.”) The Miami International Airport’s Twitter account was quick to correct Scavino: < This video is not from Miami International Airport. — Miami Int’l Airport (@iflymia) September 10, 2017 > Scavino deleted the video, explaining that he was inundated with information when he shared his erroneous message: < Thank you. It was among 100s of videos/pics I am receiving re: Irma from public. In trying to notify all, I shared – have deleted. Be safe! > Mexico had offered to send help to victims of Hurricane Harvey, which made landfall in Texas in August 2017 just days before its counterpart Irma hit the Caribbean, but rescinded the offer after a massive earthquake hit its Pacific coast on 8 September 2017, killing dozens and leaving millions of people in Mexico in need of aid.

Agencia EFE..  “Aeropuerto de Ciudad de México Suspende Operaciones por Fuertes Lluvias.”   30 August 2017.;Selk, Avi.  “How Trump’s Social Media Director Got Hoaxed About Hurricane Irma.”   Washington Post.  10 September 2017.

oregon-gun-confiscation

oregon-gun-confiscation

In August 2017, Oregon governor Kate Brown signed a "gun confiscation" law.

On 23 August 2017, the right-leaning web site Silence Is Consent reported that Oregon’s governor, Kate Brown, had signed a law which would allow for the confiscation of firearms without a number of conventional constitutional protections for the individual: < In an unprecedented move of ruthless tyranny, Oregon Governor Kate Brown has just signed into law a Democrat-backed document which allows the government to confiscate guns without any prior notice. The law, based off of Oregon Senate Bill 719, has faced massive resistance from Republicans and Oregon citizens alike. Despite this, the local governments managed to sign it into law — Oregon is no longer a free state. This new anti-second amendment law permits government officials to order the confiscation of guns, simply based off of hearsay evidence. There is no actual evidence required to order this confiscation, and before the gun owner is even given a hearing. Worse yet, the only way for the gun owner to get his gun back is to file a case and prove his innocence. This is Orwellian, and it must be overturned by the Supreme Court; if this law begins being enforced, step by step, inch by inch, civilians will lose their second amendment rights. > The article accurately describes some components and implications of the law, but also greatly exaggerates its provisions, uses unspecific and misleading language, and also leaves out important facts and context about the legislation. Oregon Senate Bill 719 is intended to introduce a judicial process whereby concerned individuals can ask a judge to quickly sign an order allowing for the confiscation of firearms from a particular individual deemed to present a risk of suicide, self-harm, or violence to others.  It was signed into law by Governor Kate Brown on 23 August 2017, and will come into force on 1 January 2018. The bill authorizes law enforcement agents to confiscate guns from individuals deemed to be a danger to themselves or others, under specific, limited circumstances, in what is called an “extreme risk protection order.” It can only be requested by law enforcement officials, family members and housemates, thus largely minimizing the risk of vexatious or malicious requests. (This limitation is not mentioned by Silence is Consent.) The order can only be granted by a judge, but must be either granted or denied within 24 hours of the request. Further, it is somewhat misleading to claim, as this article does, that guns can be confiscated “simply based off of hearsay evidence” or that “no actual evidence” is required. The bill stipulates that in reaching their decision, a judge will consider the following kinds of evidence: If the request is successful, the judge issues the order, which applies for one year. The subject of the order has 24 hours to hand in any firearms or gun license they may possess, either to a law enforcement agent or licensed gun dealer. Law enforcement officials are also authorized to confiscate such firearms. For the next twelve months, the subject of the order cannot legally buy, possess, or attempt to buy or possess any firearm. They have 30 days in which to apply for a hearing to overturn the order, and such a hearing must take place within 21 days of their request. If they don’t succeed in overturning the order, the order remains in place. If they do succeed, the order is lifted, and any property handed over or taken from them is returned to them, providing they are otherwise legally authorized to possess that property. The order is not automatically renewed after a year, but whomever requested it in the first place can request a renewal. The same process applies to the renewal request as it did to the original request. One of the primary concerns of critics of the bill, who argue that it suspends due process and the right to a fair trial, is that the extreme risk protection order hearing is held ex parte, meaning that the subject of the request does not have a right to be present at the hearing and a judge need not hear or receive evidence from them. This is true. SB 719 does call for ex parte hearings, and the subject of an order cannot block it in the courts in advance, they can only apply to have it overturned afterwards. However, the legislation does also stipulate that the burden of proof is on the person making the request, not the subject of it. Another provision of the law — not mentioned by Silence is Consent — is that if the person making the request is found to have knowingly provided false information or intended to harass the subject of the request, they can be convicted of a Class A misdemeanor, which carries a prison sentence of up to twelve months in Oregon. This is the same charge and same penalty that applies to the subject of an extreme risk protection order if they violate its terms by, for example, buying or possessing a firearm after the order is in place. This provision is likely to further minimize the risk of individuals maliciously or falsely accusing one another, and underlines the intention of the bill as being to prevent vulnerable individuals from seriously harming themselves and/or others, but only after “clear and convincing” evidence of a risk is provided. The article makes a point of attacking Oregon Democrats over the bill, describing the law as “Democrat-backed.” What the article doesn’t mention is that one of the authors and public champions of the law is state senator Brian Boquist, a combat veteran inspired to begin writing the bill after the suicide of his stepson, a Navy veteran, in 2016. Boquist is a Republican. Silence is Consent also falsely describes the bill as “unprecedented.” However, SB 719 was consciously modeled after similar legislation overwhelmingly passed into law by Washington voters as a ballot measure in November 2016.

Oregon Legislative Assembly.   “Senate Bill 719.”    Oregon Legislative Assembly.   23 August 2017.;Britschgi, Christian.   “Oregon Cracks Down on Gun Rights in the Name of Suicide Prevention.”    Reason.com.   7 July 2017.;Friedman, Gordon R.   “Lawmakers Pass Bill to Take Guns Away From Those Deemed at Risk of Suicide, Shooting Sprees.”    OregonLive.com.   6 July 2017.;Friedman, Gordon R.   “Gun Surrender Bill Intended to Prevent Suicide Moves Forward.”    OregonLive.com.   1 May 2017.

cnn-staged-hurricane-harvey-rescue-video

cnn-staged-hurricane-harvey-rescue-video

CNN was caught staging a dramatic rescue during Hurricane Harvey.

A video showing CNN reporter Drew Griffin and his news crew rushing to the rescue of a man who accidentally drove his truck into a small ravine flooded by Hurricane Harvey went viral on 30 August 2017: This particular conspiracy theory, like many conspiracy theories, hinges on nothing more than an incorrect observation: Griffin was allegedly wearing shorts in one portion of the video, but pants in another. InfoWars.com attempted to explain the basis for this accusation: < The video then cuts to the moment when the vehicle becomes marooned in the water. After about 20 seconds, Griffin is seen running towards the vehicle. He is wearing khaki shorts and trainers. However, in the next clip, where Griffin is seen pulling the man out of the water, he is now wearing dark pants and boots. > Although InfoWars.com provides a set of images showing two men in CNN-branded red jackets — one wearing shorts and the other wearing pants — they did not explain how a wardrobe change would prove that this video had been staged, or how changing into pants from shorts would be necessary for the staging of such a video: This is a moot point, of course, as Griffin did not change his clothes during the course of this footage. The four men that can be seen in the video are reporter Drew Griffin (wearing a red jacket and pants), photographer Scott Pisczek (wearing a black shirt and shorts), producer Brian Rokus (wearing a red jacket and shorts), and Jerry Sumrall (the man who was pulled from the truck, who is not wearing a red jacket). Those peddling this claim apparently believe that the man spotted in shorts (around the :31 mark) was reporter Drew Griffin, not his field producer Brian Rokus. But upon reviewing the footage, this is not physically possible. Griffin can be seen running off screen to the left as he chases down the truck down the ravine. When the camera pans over, it shows a second man (Rokus, wearing shorts) who is already standing near the water. Judging by the time that passes between Griffin’s departure from the screen, the direction that he was running, and the audio of his footsteps crunching against the grass, it is not possible for Griffin to be the man in shorts. What is even less clear is why CNN — a company that has been in the video news business for decades — would put out a hoax video that was so sloppily edited. Matt Dornic, CNN’s vice president of communications, sent us a photograph of Griffin and Rokus on location. Both men are pictured wearing red CNN-branded jackets, as is standard for field reporting and producing: Dornic also called the accusations “total BS” in a tweet: < ?Absolutely absurd and total BS. There are two different people wearing CNN rain jackets. Wish I could say I’m surprised but.. https://t.co/O0zyyfT8iC — Matt Dornic (@mdornic) August 31, 2017 > We were also able to view the raw footage of CNN’s rescue, and can confirm that the only things of note edited out of the original footage were a few off-camera curse words and roughly 90 seconds of a blurry street sign. This conspiracy theory hinges on the idea that Drew Griffin changed from shorts to pants in the middle of his report. And although we still aren’t sure how this detail would be relevant in the staging of a rescue, this video actually shows two different men, Griffin and his producer Brian Rokus, wearing similar red jackets.

Ellefson, Lindsey.  “CNN Correspondent Helps Rescue Man in Texas Flooding.”   CNN  30 August 2017.

poison-goodies-halloween-children

poison-goodies-halloween-children

Police have documented cases of people randomly distributing poisoned goodies to children on Halloween.

Tales of black-hearted madmen doling out poisoned Halloween candy to unsuspecting little tykes have been around for decades — they were part of my Halloween experience more than forty years ago. And every year sees the same flurry of activity in response to such rumors: radio, TV and newspapers issue dark warnings about tampered candy and suggest taking the little ones to parties instead of collecting goodies door-to-door. Even Ann Landers published a column in 1995 warning us against the mad poisoner, saying, “In recent years, there have been reports of people with twisted minds putting razor blades and poison in taffy apples and Halloween candy.” (Recent years? Poison?) It’s a sadness that a holiday so thoroughly and greedily enjoyed by kids is being sanitized out of existence in the name of safety. Sadder still is there appears to be little reason for it. Let’s set the criteria for what constitutes a Halloween poisoning and then examine the famous and not-so-famous cases often pointed to as examples of this horror: < To qualify as a Halloween poisoning, poisoned candy has to be handed out on a random basis to children as part of the trick-or-treating ritual inherent to Halloween. The act cannot be targeted to any one specific child. > By far the most famous case of Halloween candy poisoning was the murder of eight-year-old Timothy Marc O’Bryan at the hands of his father, Ronald Clark O’Bryan, in Houston, Texas. The child died at 10 p.m. on 31 October 1974, as a result of eating cyanide-laced Pixie Stix acquired while trick-or-treating. To make his act appear more like the work of a random madman, O’Bryan also gave poisoned Pixie Stix to his daughter and three other children. By a kind stroke of fate, none of the other children ate the candy. The prosecution proved the father had purchased cyanide and had (along with a neighbor) accompanied the group of children on their door-to-door mission. None of the places visited that night were giving out Pixie Stix. Young Mark’s life was insured for a large sum of money, and collecting on this policy has always been pointed to as the motive behind this murder. Though the case was circumstantial (no one saw the father poison the candy or slip the Pixie Stix into the boy’s bag), Ronald O’Bryan was convicted of the murder in May 1975. He received the death sentence and was executed by lethal injection on 31 March 1984 (not on the poetically-just 31 October as is often recounted in off-the-cuff retellings of the case). The O’Bryan murder was an attempt to use a well-known urban legend to cover up the premeditated murder of one particular child. (Note that for this explanation of the boy’s murder to have been believed, the legend had to have been in wide circulation by 1974.) Though cold-blooded and horrible to contemplate, this crime still does not qualify as a genuine Halloween poisoning because there was nothing random about Timothy O’Bryan’s death. (The specter of the mad poisoner from the 1982 Tylenol murders was similarly employed by various murderers attempting to cover their tracks.) This case was widely reported as a real-life example of Halloween sadism. Not nearly so widely circulated were the results of the police investigation, which concluded the boy had accidentally got into his uncle’s heroin stash and poisoned himself, and that the family had sprinkled heroin on the kid’s candy after the fact to protect the uncle. Antedating both these stories is the odd case of Helen Pfeil, a Greenlawn, N.Y. housewife who was arrested in 1964 for handing out arsenic-laced ant poison buttons as part of a self-evident Halloween joke. Annoyed that many of the trick-or-treaters were too old to be asking for free candy, she made up packages of inedible “treats” to give to the teenagers. The packages contained dog biscuits, steel wool pads and the ant buttons (which were clearly marked “Poison” and labeled with a skull and crossbones). She also took the precaution of telling the teenagers that the packages were a joke when she handed them out, and there is no record of anyone’s being harmed by her actions. Even so, the potential for harm was there so she was charged. She pled guilty to endangering children and eventually received a suspended sentence. What initially appeared to be a (non-Halloween) random poisoning attempt aimed at children occurred in Emerson, N.J. On 8 October 1988, The New York Times said traces of strychnine were found in a box of Sunkist Fun Fruits Dinosaurs purchased on September 23 in a New Jersey grocery. The suspicious powder the State Police lab had initially labeled strychnine was retested by the Food and Drug Administration and pronounced corn starch. The New York Times printed the updated version of the story on 14 October 1988, but not before Thomas J. Lipton Inc. (the manufacturer of Fun Fruits) destroyed 9400 cases of the product. The company maintained that the negative publicity surrounding this story had an adverse effect on their image. Though it’s impossible to accurately measure such things, I believe their claim has merit. It’s human nature to recall the destruction of the candy but forget it was a false alarm, and it is only reasonable to assume their image was somewhat damaged. (Those initial “Oh my god!” news stories do a fair deal of damage because bits of them stay in the average person’s memory whereas retractions or follow-ups do not. Since they lend apparent credence to a myth that’s already believed, these “facts” don’t get discarded when new information comes along.) After Halloween 1994, a three-year-old New Britain, Connecticut, child was diagnosed as suffering from cocaine poisoning. Though he’d been sick earlier in the day and also had a habit of putting anything he found in his mouth, the finger was immediately pointed at tampered Halloween candy (with all the usual attendant media hysteria). More than a week later the local police announced that no traces of cocaine or any other drugs had been found on the leftover piece of candy that was supposed to have poisoned the boy. In 1982 the police of Redford Township (Detroit) had to issue a similar statement after a youth there became ill and his doctor misread initial lab results and then went public with charges of cyanide poisoning and doctored Halloween candy. Tests done on the lad to determine what was wrong were inconclusive, and later FDA tests of the candy turned up no contamination whatsoever. Another suspected Halloween poisoning occurred in Washington, DC in 1991. 31-year-old Kevin Michael Cherry of Montgomery County coincidentally died of heart failure after eating some of his child’s Halloween loot. As told in the 2 November 1991 Washington Times, anxious parents dumped pounds of their kids’ candy before the true cause of death was determined by autopsy. A further Halloween scare case was that of Ariel Katz, a 7-year-old Santa Monica girl who died of congenital heart failure on 31 October 1990 while trick-or-treating. The police feared a mass random poisoning and acted immediately on what they suspected, as reported in the 2 November 1990 Los Angeles Times: < Santa Monica police had conducted an intense door-to-door search on the street where the youngster collapsed. They feared that other children might have picked up tainted Halloween candy, and they blocked off the 700 block of 12th Street for several hours while they confiscated candy and interviewed residents and revelers. > Seven-year-old Ferdinan Siquig of San Jose, CA. collapsed on 31 October 1996 after eating candy and cookies he was given while trick-or-treating. Initial urine analysis at the hospital revealed traces of cocaine. Subsequent tests done by outside labs came back negative, and it was further concluded that the initial test results were wrong, but this conclusion was reached at least a day after the media had picked up on the story and scared the bejeezus out of everyone yet again with tales of a poisoner on the loose. In 2001, four-year-old Tiffaney Troung of Vancouver died a day after ingesting candy she picked up trick-or-treating on Halloween. Police reacted by issuing an alert to area parents to dump whatever goodies their kids had collected. The cause of death was ultimately pegged as non-contagious sepsis-causing streptococcus bacteria (which can cause everything from strep throat to flesh-eating disease). The Halloween candy Tiffaney ate played no part in her death. An odd act of randomness occurred in the town of Hercules, California (near San Francisco) in 2000. Some trick-or-treaters came home with little packets of marijuana done up to look like miniature Snickers bars. Parents of the kids who received this beneficence quickly contacted the police, who just as quickly traced the giveaway to a particular house. There, a mystified homeowner was confronted about the find. Police investigated and were satisfied the homeowner had no knowledge of the special contents of certain bars that were handed out that night. The marijuana packets dressed up to look like Snickers bars had landed in the Hercules dead letter office because whoever had tried to mail a package containing them either didn’t use enough postage or had listed an incorrect address. A postal employee (the mystified homeowner) charged with transporting the bars plus various canned goods that had accumulated in the dead letter office to a local charity kept the candy for his own use. He brought the “candy” home to give out on Halloween, thinking the Snickers bars were, well, Snickers bars. The “trick” ended up being on him. Putting the crazed Halloween poisoner story to rest can be quite the task, as was outlined in a 9 November 1989 article in the Los Angeles Times. The following is an excerpt from an interview with Joel Best, a professor of sociology at California State University, Fresno, who has been trying to debunk this urban legend for more than thirty years: < “We checked major newspapers from throughout the country from 1958 through 1988,” he said, “assuming that any story this horrible would certainly be well reported.” Well, they found a total of 78 cases and two deaths. [The two deaths Best was referring to were the O’Bryan murder and the accidental poisoning of Kevin Toston.] Further checking proved that almost all of the 78 cases were pranks. The deaths were tragically real, but they, too, were misrepresented in the beginning. The pranks, he said, were all of kids — after years of hearing similar stories — inserting needles or razor blades into fruit, not realizing (or maybe realizing) how much they frightened their whole town. “My favorite,” Best says, “was the kid who brought a half-eaten candy bar to his parents and said, ‘I think there’s ant poison on this.’ They had it checked and, sure enough, there was ant poison on it — significantly, on the end he had not bitten.” Of course, the youngster had applied the poison himself. Best has tried mightily over the years to destroy this particular myth, but obviously to no avail. “It’s the old problem of trying to prove a negative,” he says. > Sad to say, foreign objects hidden in Halloween loot are part of the trick-or-treat experience, but these incidents are few and far between, and our fear of them is greatly out of proportion with the likelihood of their occurring. Acting on this out-of-control fear, some hospitals and police departments have taken to x-raying bags of Halloween plunder, as noted in the 31 October 1993 Washington Post: < Of several contacted, only Maryland Hospital Center reported discovering what seemed to be a real threat — a needle detected by X-ray in a candy bar in 1988. But there was never an arrest or resolution in the case. In the ten years the National Confectioners Association has run its Halloween Hot Line, the group has yet to verify an instance of tampering, said spokesman Bill Sheehan. “These myths become truisms.” > Sightings:  This legend appears in a 1986 Jack Chick tract about the satanic influences of Halloween.

Best, Joel.  “The Myth of the Halloween Sadist.”   Psychology Today.  November 1985  (pp. 14-16).;Best, Joel and Gerald Horiuchi.  “The Razor Blade in the Apple.”   Social Problems.  June 1985  (Vol. 32, No. 5, pp. 488-499).;Calgary Herald.  “Trick-or-Treater Died of Natural Causes: Coroner.”   29 January 2002  (p. A4).;Canadian Press.  “Halloween Candy Didn’t Kill Girl.”   9 November 2001.;Fulbright, Leslie.  “Trick-or-Treat? Hercules Kids Find Pot Inside Their Snickers.”   Contra Costa Times.  1 November 2000.;Hill, Retha.  “Autopsy Shows Md. Man Died of Heart Disease, Not Poisoned Candy.”   The Washington Post.  2 November 1991  (p. C2).;Lee, Henry.  “Hercules Parents Find Pot in Halloween Candy.”   The San Francisco Chronicle.  2 November 2000  (p. A19).;Lyall, Sarah.  “Poison Found in Jersey Candy.”   The New York Times.  8 October 1988.;Ramos, George.  “Boy, 12, on First Trick-or-Treat, Is Shot for Candy.”   Los Angeles Times.  2 November 1990  (p. A1).;Reuters.  “California Child Gets Cocaine-Laced Halloween Treat.”   1 November 1996.;Reuters.  “Calif. Candy Scare Proves Unfounded.”   1 November 1996.;Schneider, Howard.  “Halloween Unearths a Few Old Fears and Rumors.”   The Washington Post.  31 October 1993  (p. B8).;Silbiger, Hollace.  “Other Residents Report Bad-Tasting or Smelly Candy.”   The Plain Dealer.  4 November 1997  (p. B1).;Squatriglia, Chuck.  “Source Traced for Halloween Pot Treats.”   The San Francisco Chronicle.  3 November 2000  (p. A23).;UPI.  “Regional News: Somerdale.”   11 November 1982.;UPI.  “Barbiturates and Amphitamines Found in Somerdale Halloween Candy.”   2 November 1982.

were-police-told-stand-down-charlottesville

were-police-told-stand-down-charlottesville

Bethania Palma

Police in Charlottesville were issued a "stand down" order and told to let violence happen.

On 15 August 2017, the disreputable web site YourNewsWire posted a story purporting to quote an “anonymous” police officer saying that law enforcement in Charlottesville, Virginia had been instructed not only to “stand down” during a violent white supremacist rally, but to instigate violence by purposely bringing rival groups together in order to start a race war. YourNewsWire dives deep into conspiracy territory, claiming the chaos at the weekend rally was instigated by the “deep state,” as well as former President Barack Obama and former Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton: < The New World Order, led in the United States by elite operatives Obama, Podesta, Soros, Clinton and company, are pulling out all the stops to create division through chaos and destruction. Crowds of paid protestors and useful psychopaths are being sent into pitched battle against one another to sour the mood of the nation and further divide us all. They are manipulating and controlling newsworthy events in order to maintain power and control over the public, and to swing public opinion. > The web site quotes a supposed anonymous police officer as saying: < We [Charlotesville police] were ordered to bring the rival groups together. As soon as they were in contact with each other, we were told to stand down. It was outrageous. We weren’t allowed to arrest anyone without asking the mayor first. We weren’t even allowed to stop the driver as he sped away. The event was being set up as far back as at least May and it went like clockwork. We wanted to do our job and keep the peace. But these mother******s in charge really want to destroy America. > We found no evidence the supposed quote being shared on the Internet and featured by YourNewsWire is authentic, and because it’s not only unattributed but vague, we have no way of tracing it. However it only appears on YourNewsWire and other junk sites that cite YourNewsWire, a web site that regularly posts unfounded conspiracy theories. Violence did plague the city of Charlottesville through the weekend of 11 August 2017, as protests, general unrest, and street brawls broke out surrounding the “Unite the Right” white supremacist rally. One woman was killed when a rally attendee reportedly purposely rammed his car into a crowd of counter-demonstrators, and two state police officers lost their lives when the helicopter they were flying to monitor the unrest crashed. However we were able to confirm via a Freedom of Information Act request that no official “stand down” order was given. The rumor seems to have its roots in a 12 August 2017 tweet posted by the Virginia chapter of the American Civil Liberties Union, which cited an unnamed police officer saying law enforcement would wait for a “command” before intervening in street clashes: < Clash between protesters and counter protesters. Police says “We’ll not intervene until given command to do so.” #Charlottesville pic.twitter.com/UkRDlNn2mv — ACLU of Virginia (@ACLUVA) August 12, 2017 > The same day, investigative news outlet ProPublica published a story reporting police inaction in the face of violence: < There was nothing haphazard about the violence that erupted today in this bucolic town in Virginia’s heartland. At about 10 a.m. today, at one of countless such confrontations, an angry mob of white supremacists formed a battle line across from a group of counter-protesters, many of them older and gray-haired, who had gathered near a church parking lot. On command from their leader, the young men charged and pummeled their ideological foes with abandon. One woman was hurled to the pavement, and the blood from her bruised head was instantly visible. Standing nearby, an assortment of Virginia State Police troopers and Charlottesville police wearing protective gear watched silently from behind an array of metal barricades — and did nothing. It was a scene that played out over and over in Charlottesville as law enforcement confronted the largest public gathering of white supremacists in decades. We walked the streets beginning in the early morning hours and repeatedly witnessed instances in which authorities took a largely laissez faire approach, allowing white supremacists and counter-protesters to physically battle. > On 14 August 2017, Fox News reporter Doug McKelway claimed to have a specific police source that told him officers were ordered not to engage. He said: < I know for a fact that we have heard from a senior law enforcement from another county nearby this one, nearby Albemarle County, who that says that some of his underlings who attended a briefing here conducted by the city of Charlottesville and the police department of Charlottesville and the mayor’s office of Charlottesville before Saturday morning’s riot happened, that they were not to make arrests without the explicit approval of the mayor of the city of Charlottesville. > Despite the critique by some that police didn’t do enough to quell violence, both police Chief Al Thomas and city spokeswoman Miriam Dickler said no such order was issued. We filed a FOIA seeking any records documenting such an order by either the city, or by any agency outside the city to Charlottesville police and received this response: < We have no records responsive to this request. > Dickler explained to us why the claim that the mayor issued a stand-down order which police were required to obey is not possible: The city operates under a council-manager form of municipal government, meaning the city manager functions as the executive. Under this system, the mayor is selected by the City Council, not voters. The role rotates and is mostly ceremonial in its duties. Thus, Charlottesville Mayor Michael Signer would not have had the authority to issue a “stand-down” order to the police. In a statement, Chief Al Thomas described the general chaos that ensued when protest leaders failed to follow a plan previously agreed upon by organizers and law enforcement — for instance, people left their area to go into those designated for counter-demonstrators and engage in confrontations. Thomas’s statement reads: < We worked with our partners in Virginia State Police, the Virginia Fusion center and Federal Bureau of Investigation to collect intelligence before and during this event, this included having analysts in the command post on August 12. In preparation for this event, we reached out to all the groups we believed would be attending with the permit holder and made contact with the security details of all the speakers. This contact included reviewing the security plan we had developed. All these groups agreed to cooperate with law enforcement and follow that plan. It is unfortunate that that did not happen.  In preparing the park, we established three areas, one for the demonstrators, one for counter demonstrators and an area between the two for police officers. The security plan called for the demonstrators to enter through the rear of the park, and we also staged law enforcement in that area to facilitate that entrance.  Rather than doing so, the demonstrators entered from the front of the park. They also chose to leave the park on a number of occasions, entering the area designated for counter-demonstrators, walking along the street and confronting counter-protestors.  Because the demonstrators did not stay in their designated area, the police moved from the area between the two areas to better patrol the park and area. Once the demonstrators did not stay in their designated area, the police moved from the separated area to manage the crowd. There were a number of fights throughout the area that officers from all agencies responded to. Once people in the crowd released gas, the decision was made to put the officers in riot gear to better address the unfolding situation.  I was the commander for this incident, but our command center was a unified command, including Virginia State Police, Albemarle County Police, University Police, federal authorities and the National Guard. The command center also included personnel from our fire and EMS services and support staff. While a unified command works together to make critical decisions, I oversaw the operation and was the final say.  There were police throughout the park and area beginning in the early morning and throughout the day. There were no directives from me or any other commander to stand down or disengage. As I previously said, there were a number of altercations throughout the area in which officers intervened.  As with any major incident, CPD will be reviewing the events of the day over the next weeks and months. We remain committed to providing our residents with a strong, safe city to live in and to being a partner to our community. > It’s unclear how much a last-minute change in the demonstration’s location affected the outcome, as the city initially revoked a permit for the rally to be held in Emancipation Park in downtown Charlottesville and tried to move it about a mile away to McIntire Park, which is much larger in size and away from the city center. In response, organizer Jason Kessler and the Virginia ACLU sued the city, and at the last minute — at about 8 P.M. on Friday night — a judge issued an injunction which allowed the demonstration to remain at Emancipation Park. Since the weekend’s deadly events, all sides have pointed fingers, blaming each other for what followed. Virginia Governor Terry McAuliffe told NPR that the venue did make a difference: < That rally should not have been in the middle of downtown… where [people] dispersed all over the city streets, and it became a powder keg. > A report by Bay Area public radio station KQED quoted California State University San Bernardino professor Brian Levin, who said that intervening in street brawls may have had the effect of causing protesters to unify and attack police: < Sometimes intervention by police will result in everyone attacking the police. If there’s one thing that can unify rival protesters, it’s the presence of the police. They’re making a tactical judgment > In the aftermath of the violent and deadly rally, there has been both praise and criticism of how police handled the events. What seems clear is that statements by unnamed individual officers have been exaggerated and subsequently spun into full-blown conspiracy mongering. We have been able to confirm, however, that the mayor of Charlottesville didn’t issue a “stand-down” order, nor did any city official, including Charlottesville police Chief Thomas, who was in command of the consortium of local and state agencies that made up law enforcement’s response.Â

Baxter, Dmitry.   “Police: Charlottesville Was ‘Inside Job’ to Ignite Race War.”    YourNewsWire.com.   15 August 2017.;Fox News.   “Ron Hosko Discusses the Police Response to Charlottesville.”    14 August 2017.;Thompson, A.C., et al.   “Police Stood By as Mayhem Mounted in Charlottesville.”    ProPublica.   12 August 2017.;Wamsley, Laurel.   “Charlottesville Violence Highlights Cities’ Struggle To Balance Rights And Safety.”    NPR.   14 August 2017.;Sepulvedo, John, and Johnson, Bert.   “Do Police Allow Safe Spaces for White Nationalist Violence?”    KQED.   16 August 2017.;Hernández, Arelis.   “Charlottesville Police Chief Defends Officers, Police Response at Violent Rally.”     Washington Post.  14 August 2017.

charles-krauthammer-the-enemy-among-us

charles-krauthammer-the-enemy-among-us

Questionable Quotes

Columnist Charles Krauthammer wrote an opinion piece entitled "The Enemy Among Us" alleging that former President Barack Obama was creating a "shadow government" through his nonprofit Organizing for Action.

MISATTRIBUTED

An opinion piece arguing that former President Barack Obama’s nonprofit Organizing for Action (OFA) is a “shadow government” organization aimed at tearing down the Constitution has been circulating under various titles since it was originally published in February 2017. But it wasn’t until months later, when Washington Post columnist Charles Krauthammer’s name was erroneously attached to the text, that this opinion piece started gaining popularity. A portion of this opinion piece as it circulated under the title “The Enemy Among Us” is reproduced below: < I do not understand how living in a country with its democracy established over 200 years ago, and now, for the first time in history, suddenly we have one of our former presidents set up a group called “Organizing for Action” (OFA). OFA is 30,000+ strong and working to disrupt everything that our current president’s administration is trying to do. This organization goes against our Democracy, and it is an operation that will destroy our way of governing. It goes against our Constitution, our laws, and the processes established over 200 years ago. If it is allowed to proceed then we will be living in chaos very much like third world countries are run. What good is it to have an established government if it is not going to be respected and allowed to follow our laws? If you had an army some 30,000 strong and a court system stacked over the decades with judges who would allow you to break the laws, how much damage could you do to a country? We are about to find out in America! > The claim that Krauthammer penned this op-ed seems to have originated on the the web site Nesara News, which introduced the text with a brief paragraph lauding the credibility of the conservative columnist on 11 October 2017. The web site also claimed that the article had appeared in the New York Post: < Krauthammer is about the best and brightest journalist and political analyst we have, in my opinion. His words of warning in the below message should be taken seriously and spread throughout the country so as many of our citizens as possible are made aware of what is happening right under our noses! An article from the New York Post: > This article was never published in the New York Post, nor was it written by Charles Krauthammer. In fact, the Post’s author page for Krauthammer only lists two articles, both of which were published in 2009, and neither of which dealt with Organizing for Action. The majority of this text originated in a 13 February 2017 blog post on “The Daily Jot,” nearly 8 months before Krauthammer’s name was erroneously attached to it. The post was entitled “The Perilous Times We Live In” and attributed to Christian journalist Bill Wilson. With the exception of the opening and closing paragraphs, Wilson’s article and the “Krauthammer” article are practically identical. Here’s a comparison of the two articles with the shared text highlighted: Wilson confirmed to us via email that he is the original author of this op-ed. Mike Watson, a research assistant for Krauthammer, also told us via email that this op-ed did not originate with the conservative columnist: < Dr. Krauthammer did not write it and has nothing to do with it. > Krauthammer’s name was simply tacked onto the end of this article in an attempt to lend it an air of credibility. We previously addressed the claim that President Obama was forming a shadow government to undermine the Trump presidency and found that it was based on little to no evidence.Â

Wilson, Bill.  “The Perilous Times We Live In.”   Daily Jot.  13 February 2017.;Sperry, Paul.  “How Obama is Scheming to Sabotage Trump’s Presidency.”   New York Post.  11 February 2017.

"conspiracy" AND "theory" AND "pizzagate" AND "2011" AND "interview"
"trump" AND "pizzagate"

conspiracy-theory-pizzagate-2011-interview

conspiracy-theory-pizzagate-2011-interview

Donald Trump referred to the pedophilia conspiracy theory that has come to be known as "Pizzagate" during a 2011 interview.

MOSTLY FALSE

In August 2017, months after the “Pizzagate” conspiracy theory was roundly disproved, a piece of video appeared that purportedly shows featuring Donald Trump talking to television anchor Piers Morgan in 2011 about the Anthony Weiner scandal. This time, however, it was repackaged as “proof” that the future president was one of the first to know about the debunked conspiracy theory that Washington, D.C.’s elite run a pedophilia ring out of a popular pizzeria’s basement. For example, one YouTube user preceded the video by the following narration: < This is an interview from 2011 with Donald Trump and Piers Morgan, i think that’s his name, the scum bag guy that worked with Alex Jones for the second amendment. Blah blah blah you know the story. Anyway, Donald Trump is doing the interview with this guy and out of the blue he mentions pizzagate. This is 2011. Pizzagate. It’s clear as a bell. You can’t miss it. Now I ran back through 2011 and I can’t find anything pizzagate related besides Donald Trump mentioning it. > The YouTuber who posted the augmented video said that he couldn’t find anything else from 2011 that was called or related to anything named Pizzagate, implying that Trump had perhaps predicted the manufactured 2016 controversy; however, we found several mentions of a 2011 Pizzagate moniker that had nothing to do with pedophile rings. This Pizzagate came from a June 2011 lunch meeting between Trump and former Alaska governor Sarah Palin. The two discussed various political matters, but much of the media was focused on a different detail: Trump ate his pizza with a fork. The revelation sparked a wave of opinion pieces about the proper way to eat pizza: Trump’s 2011 interview with CNN aired amidst this tempest:

Hamby, Peter.  “Palin, Trump discuss ‘potential candidates’ over pizza in New York.”   CNN.  1 June 2011.;Martel, Franciz.  “Herman Cain On Trump’s ‘Pizzagate’: If You’re Born With A Silver Spoon, You Eat Pizza With Utensils.”   Mediate.  4 June 2011.;Grant, Drew.  “Donald Trump Responds to Pizzagate 2011.”   Salon.  2 June 2011.;Alvarez, Alex.  “Attention Hog? Donald Trump Addresses ‘Pizza-gate’ Via Strange Homemade Video.”   Mediate.  2 June 2011.;Siegel, Joel.  “Sarah Palin, Donald Trump Lambasted for Pizza Faux Pas.”   ABC.  2 June 2011.;Passikoff, Robert.  “Politically Correct Pizza Party.”   Forbes.  2 June 2011.;Roberts, Christine.  “Use Your Hands! New Yorkers Respond to Sarah Palin, Donald Trump Pizza-Eating Faux Pas.”   New York Daily News.  1 June 2011.

puerto-rico-teamsters

puerto-rico-teamsters

In September 2017, truck drivers' unions in Puerto Rico went on strike and refused to take part in relief efforts after a series of hurricanes.

With Puerto Rico experiencing a humanitarian and infrastructural crisis in the aftermath of a series of hurricanes, a flurry of stories appeared at the end of September 2017 falsely claiming that a local union representing truck drivers had gone on strike, using the devastation to leverage an improvement in their pay and working conditions. On 30 September 2017, the Conservative Treehouse blog quoted extensively (but selectively) from comments given to the Huffington Post by United States Air Force Colonel Michael Valle: < “The aid is getting to Puerto Rico. The problem is distribution. The federal government has sent us a lot of help; moving those supplies, in particular, fuel, is the issue right now,” says Col. Valle. Until power can be restored, generators are critical for hospitals and shelter facilities and more. But, and it’s a big but, they can’t get the fuel to run the generators. They have the generators, water, food, medicine, and fuel on the ground, yet the supplies are not moving across the island as quickly as they’re needed. “It’s a lack of drivers for the transport trucks, the 18 wheelers. Supplies we have. Trucks we have. There are ships full of supplies backed up in the ports, waiting to have a vehicle to unload into. However, only 20% of the truck drivers show up to work. These are private citizens in Puerto Rico, paid by companies that are contracted by the government,” says Col. Valle. > The Conservative Treehouse then went on to claim, again falsely, that the cause of this shortfall in truck drivers was a deliberate, coordinated strike action by the local Teamsters union. Similar claims were also made by the Gateway Pundit and entrepreneur Kambree Kawahine Koa. The International Brotherhood of Teamsters rejected these claims entirely, telling us the reports were “fake news” and adding that the Teamsters Local 901 in Puerto Rico was “doing everything but refuse to help” in relief efforts. In a statement, Teamsters General President Jim Hoffa called the reports “nothing but lies”: < These viral stories spreading across the internet are nothing but lies perpetrated by anti-union entities to further their destructive agenda. The fact that they are attempting to capitalize on the suffering of millions of citizens in Puerto Rico that are in dire need of our help by pushing these false stories, just exposes their true nature. > On 29 September 2017, the International Brotherhood of Teamsters issued a plea for help to members throughout the mainland United States, describing the efforts being made by local truck drivers in Puerto Rico, in the face of infrastructural devastation: < The Teamsters are doing what they can to improve the lives of our members there. That includes working with Joint Council 16 as well as Local 901 leadership in San Juan to identify ways how the union can help. The Teamsters are also joining together with labor unions from across the nation to identify skilled workers to travel to Puerto Rico next week to provide much needed support in critical areas. There is currently a need for volunteer truck drivers who hold a Commercial Driver’s License (CDL) to transport shipping containers from the port to distribution centers throughout the island. Additionally, the Teamsters Freight, Airline, Passenger Transport, Package, Public Services and Waste Divisions are contacting Teamster employers that operate in Puerto Rico and our local unions throughout the U.S. and Canada to identify avenues of support and volunteers. At this time, it is unclear if there are trucks available to move the containers, fuel to operate the trucks or road access to the distribution centers. However, the labor movement is working on the ground in Puerto Rico to bring volunteers to meet specific needs. > Indeed, Colonel Michael Valle — one of the sources cited by the Conservative Treehouse — went on to tell the Huffington Post: < There should be zero blame on the drivers. They can’t get to work, the infrastructure is destroyed, they can’t get fuel themselves, and they can’t call us for help because there’s no communication. The will of the people of Puerto Rico is off the charts. The truck drivers have families to take care of, many of them have no food or water. They have to take care of their family’s needs before they go off to work, and once they do go, they can’t call home. [Emphasis added]. > A CNBC report cited in the Conservative Treehouse post also undermines the claim that there was a strike. As the reporter explains: < There are 3,000 cargo containers here at Crowley, one of the biggest shippers in Puerto Rico…Here’s the problem – the truck drivers can’t get to the terminal to get their containers out…You’re looking at truck drivers who can’t be reached by their businesses by cell phone, they don’t have the gas to get to work, and then even when they do get to work, their semi-trucks don’t have fuel. The problem is the supply chain. > Contrary to all this, the Conservative Treehouse claims that the local Teamsters union, which the article (again, falsely) identifies as Frente Amplio, “is refusing to move the product.” A spokesperson for the International Brotherhood of Teamsters confirmed that Frente Amplio is an independent truck drivers’ union in Puerto Rico and is not affiliated with the Teamsters in any way. In any event, the Conservative Treehouse cites a Wapa TV interview with Victor Rodriguez, President of Frente Amplio, as evidence of a strike by truck drivers. In fact, it is evidence of no such thing. In the interview, Rodriguez criticizes Puerto Rico’s governor Ricardo Rosselló for a law he signed in April that changed how truck drivers obtain permits, but he does not declare strike action or a refusal to work on the part of Frente Amplio members. He says: < The truckers are doing what they need to do. The one not doing what he needs to do is the governor. > Rodriguez states that his organization had actually called off a planned strike before the arrival of Hurricane Irma, which caused widespread infrastructural damage to Puerto Rico in early September. < The governor of Puerto Rico was lucky — three weeks before Irma there was going to be a strike because of the law he passed. > At one point, Rodriguez does point to the power and leverage held by his members, saying: < The power is with the truckers. If the truckers don’t move, this country won’t move for two years. > However, he does not declare a strike or refusal to work and affirms “the truckers are going to work,” in this exchange with Wapa TV’s Eliezer Ramos: < Ramos: Are you telling me that truck drivers are not reporting to work because of a law? Rodriguez: No, we’re doing what we need to do. Ramos: But you just said that because of a law – Rodriguez: No, excuse me, the truckers are going to work, and I expect truck drivers in the country to keep working with the people, who made it possible for us to use the roads. > Puerto Rico’s Teamsters Local 901 are not on strike or refusing to work, and they are in fact pleading with truck drivers on the United States mainland to help in the distribution of fuel and supplies there. The Conservative Treehouse’s claims about this are based on cherry-picked quotes from a United States Air Force Colonel and a CNBC reporter, both of whose full remarks make clear that truck drivers in Puerto Rico are hampered by severe problems with infrastructure and distribution, but are not refusing to work. On 2 October 2017, a government spokesperson also refuted the rumor in an interview posted by CBS News reporter David Begnaud on Twitter saying, “Everyone’s working and the supplies are getting to where they have to.”

Hayes, Penelope Jean. “U.S. Military on Puerto Rico: ‘The Problem is Distribution” and Here’s Why.”  Huffington Post. 29 September 2017.;Hoft, Jim. “Smoking Gun: San Juan Teamsters Didn’t Show Up for Work to Distribute Relief Supplies – U.S. Aid Rotting at Ports.”  The Gateway Pundit. 30 September 2017.;Munroe, Galen. “Teamsters Denounce False Reports of Work Stoppage by Union Drivers in Puerto Rico.”  International Brotherhood of Teamsters. 2 October 2017.;International Brotherhood of Teamsters. “P.R. Teamsters Need Your Assistance Now!”   International Brotherhood of Teamsters. 29 September 2017.

obama-visit-islamic-state

obama-visit-islamic-state

David Mikkelson

During a 2008 campaign stop, Barack Obama said that he had visited "57 states," a reference to 57 Islamic states.

On the campaign trail in Beaverton, Oregon, in May 2008, an obviously tired Barack Obama mistakenly told a crowd that over the course of the long campaign he had been to fifty-seven states in the U.S., with one left to go: < “… it is just wonderful to be back in Oregon, and over the last 15 months we’ve traveled to every corner of the United States. I’ve now been in fifty …. seven states? I think one left to go. One left to go. Alaska and Hawaii, I was not allowed to go to even though I really wanted to visit but my staff would not justify it.” > Talking with reporters at a later campaign stop, Senator Obama expressed concern that he’d recently misstated both the number of potential victims of a recent cyclone in Burma and the number of states he’d visited, saying: “I hope I said 100 thousand people the first time instead of 100 million. I understand I said there were 57 states today. It’s a sign that my numeracy is getting a little, uh …” Quickly enough, based on the (spurious) rumor that Barack Obama is a Muslim, someone came up with the fanciful idea that his mention of “fifty-seven states” was not a dog-tired campaigner’s simply misstating “forty-seven” as “fifty-seven,” but a reference to the Organization of the Islamic Conference (OIC), which has 57 member states: < I guesss Obama was speaking the truth about the 57 states. You are aware, probably, that Barack Obama lost his bearings recently and said that he was going to campaign in all 57 states. You heard this? And everybody chalked it up to, ‘Well, he’s tired.’ Barack Obama says he’s gonna go out and campaign in 57 states, he was just tired, you know, it’s been such a long campaign, he’s been so many places, he probably thinks there are 57 states. Well, I have here a printout from a website called the International Humanist and Ethical Union. And here is how the second paragraph of an article on that website begins. ‘Every year from 1999 to 2005 the organization of the Islamic conference representing the 57 Islamic states presented a resolution to the United Nations commission on human rights called combating.’ And the title of the piece here is, ‘How the Islamic states dominate the UN human rights council,’ and there are 57 of them. Obama said he’s going to campaign in 57 states, and it turns out that there are 57 Islamic states. There are 57 Islamic states. So did Obama just lose his bearings, or was this a more telling slip, ladies and gentlemen? > (Actually, the OIC encompasses 60 countries altogether: 57 member states and 3 observer states.) The actual intent behind Senator Obama’s misstatement was easy to discern without the need to invoke an obscure international organization. He was trying to express the thought that in all the time he had spent on the campaign trail so far in 2007-08, he had visited all (48) of the states in the continental U.S. save for one (i.e., “one left to go,” excluding Alaska and Hawaii), but in his weariness he slipped up and started off with “fifty” instead of “forty.” (Note the long pause in the video clip between the words “fifty” and “seven.”) As for the next obvious question, depending upon the definitional criteria used, there are more or less than 57 Islamic countries/nations/states in the world. If an Islamic state is defined to mean any country in which a majority of the indigenous population is Muslim, then the total number of Islamic states is actually a little lower (about 52). All such numbers are estimates, however, and are subject to additional definitional criteria. As for Barack Obama’s “fifty-seven states” verbal slip-up, it wasn’t long before some wags also spoofed a previous controversy over the senator’s eschewing the wearing of a U.S. flag lapel pin by coming up with a revised version of that familiar adornment:

Malcolm, Andrews.  “Barack Obama Wants to Be President of These 57 United States.”   Los Angeles Times [‘Top of the Ticket’ Blog].  9 May 2008.

did-jared-kushner-scrub-his-twitter-account-after-manafort-indictment

did-jared-kushner-scrub-his-twitter-account-after-manafort-indictment

Jared Kushner scrubbed his Twitter account shortly after Special Counsel Robert S. Mueller III revealed charges against three former Trump campaign officials in October 2017.

As the indictments rolled, Twitter users falsely accused Jared Kushner of trying to hide his footprints on social media. Shortly after news broke on 30 October 2017 that President Trump’s former campaign chairman Paul Manafort and longtime associate Rick Gates had been indicted on a variety of charges, a rumor started circulating that the Senior White House Advisor had scrubbed his Twitter account in an apparent attempt to cover-up any incriminating messages: This rumor is solely based on the fact that Jared Kushner’s Twitter account is empty: The account @JaredKushner does truly belong to President Trump’s son-in-law. However, Kushner did not delete any tweets after the Manafort indictments came out. Kushner has been on Twitter for several years but he has rarely, if ever used the service. In March 2017, Mashable noted how odd it was for the new head of the White House Office of American Innovation to be so unfamiliar with the social media service: < Jared Kushner, son-in-law and Senior White House Adviser to President Donald Trump, is, according to The Washington Post, leading the brand new White House Office of American Innovation, which will be devoted to modernizing the federal government with ideas plucked form the world of business. It will have a special focus on technology and data. To better understand how Kushner sees the role innovation can play in modernizing government, we dug up the former real estate mogul and New York Observer publisher’s Twitter account. Oh. Wait. Kushner, who has a verified Twitter account with 37,000 followers and joined the platform in 2009 (that’s eight years ago), has never tweeted. > Kushner’s Twitter page has been archived several times by the Internet Wayback Machine and it doesn’t appear that Kushner posted anything since Mashable’s March 2017 article. In other words, Kushner didn’t “scrub” his account because there was nothing to scrub. It appears that Kushner has only posted a few messages to Twitter since joining the service. An archived version of Kushner’s page from March 2014, for instance, showed only two tweets. One offered a position to a freelance journalist while he was owner of the New York Observer, and the other stated that he was happy to get his name back on Twitter: Both of these messages were deleted by October 2016, more than a year before members of President Trump’s campaign were indicted on various charges.Â

Ulanoff, Lance.  “The New Head of the White House Office of American Innovation Has Never Tweeted.”   Mashable.  27 March 2017.;Nussbaum, Matthew.  “Trump Campaign Aides Charged in Mueller’s Russia Probe.”   Politico.  30 October 2017.;Winter, Tom.  “Ex-Trump Adviser George Papadopoulos Pleads Guilty in Mueller’s Russia Probe.”   NBC News.  30 October 2017.

"racist" AND "protesters" AND "protected" AND "black" AND "policeman"
"white" AND "black" AND "police" AND "charlottesville"

racist-protesters-protected-black-policeman

racist-protesters-protected-black-policeman

David Mikkelson

A photograph shows a black police officer protecting participants in a white supremacist protest in Charlottesville.

On 12 August 2017, just after the occurrence of violent and tragic events at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, left multiple people dead, an image was widely circulated via social media seemingly showing a black police officer calmly standing guard to protect a group of racist protesters carrying Confederate flags, wearing Ku Klux Klan garb, and issuing Nazi salutes: Although this photograph was genuine, it was not — as was widely assumed (or stated) in social media posts — a picture snapped at the 12 August 2017 white nationalist rally in Charlottesville. The image had been posted online well over a month earlier, as shown in this 9 July 2017 tweet from Tucson, Arizona, police chief Chris Magnus: < Photo says it all. Police around nation called upon w/regularity to protect 1st Amend rights no matter how heinous they may find the speech. pic.twitter.com/3keTS7bdX2 — Chris Magnus (@ChiefCMagnus) July 9, 2017 > It was also posted on Facebook at that time by Kimberly Payne Hawk, who described the pictured policeman as “Charlottesville Police Officer Nash”: A few days later, Frank Somerville of Oakland television station KTVU wrote of the latter posting that: < Kimberly’s post went viral. But there were also a number of really nasty comments. And Kimberly later posted this in response: “On Monday I saw a photo from the KKK rally that moved me and I posted it. Now it has gone viral and mean, angry people are coming out of the woodwork. I do not care about the rude comments towards me but I am becoming quite irritated at the attacks on our local police officer. He is getting attacked for being an African American police officer who was protecting the free speech rights of the klan and I am getting accused of being a supporter of racism because my sister is a police officer. It must be a horrible way to live to be so defensive and angry all the time. I hope these people can find some happiness and peace at some point in their lives.” I’m dumbfounded that anyone could criticize this officer and what he’s doing. Thank you Officer Nash for your service. And thank you Kimberly Payne Hawk for posting this. > The image originated with a Ku Klux Klan rally held in downtown Charlottesville on 8 July 2017: < Klansmen arrive amid jeers and shouts of “Racists go home!” @USATODAY pic.twitter.com/8WSRDacqwB — Sarah Toy (@sarahtoy17) July 8, 2017 > The photograph was snapped by during that protest by Jill Mumie, one of several shots she captured on her iPhone: < That afternoon, she positioned herself near an area that had been cordoned off “in anticipation of what might unfold.” She purposefully stayed in front of the officer, waiting for what she felt was the right moment that captured the “bizarre” scene that was unfolding. Once the Loyal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan arrived, she recalled “a huge surge of people behind me.” And so with her iPhone, Mumie tried a few different shots. In one outtake, a girl stands beside the officer, snapping a picture of the commotion as the officer stares elsewhere. The angle of his chin, the tilt of his head, something felt off. In another outtake, the attention is focused on a man behind the officer who displays a middle finger in Mumie’s direction. > The officer pictured in the image was a Charlottesville High School school resource officer named Darius Nash, who said, “I don’t feel like I’m a hero for it. I swore to protect my city and that’s what I was there to do. I don’t think it makes me a hero, just doing what I believe in.”

Katz, Andrew.  “The Story Behind the Viral Photo of the Officer and the KKK.”   Time.  14 August 2017.;Van Dyke, Michelle Broder.  “A Photo Being Shared Online Showing a Black Police Officer Protecting Ku Klux Klan Members Is from a Previous Racist Rally.”   BuzzFeed News.  12 August 2017.;Toy, Sarah.  “KKK Rally in Charlottesville Met with Throng of Protesters.”   USA Today.  8 July 2017.

"trump" AND "administration" AND "puerto" AND "rico" AND "evacuees"

is-the-trump-administration-puerto-rico-evacuees

is-the-trump-administration-puerto-rico-evacuees

Hurricane Katrina

The Trump administration is making Puerto Ricans sign promissory notes and surrender passports before evacuating them or rendering aid.

On 28 September 2017, The Hill and Marketwatch both reported that the Trump administration was “forcing evacuees from Puerto Rico to sign promissory notes ensuring full repayment for transportation costs” and was holding evacuees’ passports as “collateral”: < [T]he U.S. government, in accordance with a long-standing but discretionary policy, will hold the evacuees’ passports as collateral until it gets its money. According to the U.S. Department of State’s Bureau of Consular Affairs: “Anyone evacuated on U.S.-government coordinated transport, including charter and military flights, must sign an Evacuee Manifest and Promissory Note (Form DS-5528) note prior to departure.” “The promissory note obligates an evacuated person to repay the cost of the transportation to the U.S. government.” The cost of the “promissory loan” is based on “the price of the last commercial one-way, full-fare (not discounted) economy ticket prior to the crisis.” In other words, the loan isn’t based on the discounted economy fare that many visitors probably found online to get to Puerto Rico.That’s not all: “Upon evacuation, a Department of State official must limit an evacuee’s passport. In order to obtain a new passport, an evacuee must arrange payment as agreed upon via the promissory note.” > The claim struck a nerve amid a deepening humanitarian crisis in the United States territory of Puerto Rico after Hurricane Maria caused widespread devastation the week before. The Hill based its report off of Marketwatch’s claim, which cited a U.S. Department of State page (“Information for Evacuated U.S. Citizens”) that was not specific to Hurricane Maria, the Trump administration, or Puerto Rico: < Procedures for Evacuation: Anyone evacuated on U.S.-government coordinated transport, including charter and military flights, must sign an Evacuee Manifest and Promissory Note (Form DS-5528) note prior to departure. The promissory note obligates an evacuated person to repay the cost of the transportation to the U.S. government Upon evacuation, a Department of State official must limit an evacuee’s passport. In order to obtain a new passport, an evacuee must arrange payment as agreed upon via the promissory note. > The page has no date stamp, indication of when it was published, or information about when such policy was put into place, and the earliest archived version of the page on the Internet Archive was saved on 15 September 2017; Hurricane Maria did not appear until 16 September 2017. However, identical language was published in a September 2014 Department of State handout [PDF], and the policy clearly antedated “the Trump administration.” A 19 July 2006 article from ABC News reported: < American citizens in Beirut relying on the U.S. Department of State to provide evacuation from the conflict-ridden city are faced with high and rising costs. A July 15 Department of State message tells U.S. citizens it will not “provide no-cost transportation.” Unable to present U.S. citizens with even up-front estimates for transportation costs, the Department of State has made it known that they require evacuated citizens to sign a promissory note and will bill individuals in the near future for their emergency evacuation. The government is evacuating citizens via helicopter and ferry to Cyprus where they can board commercial airlines home. Faerlie Wilson, an American student studying in Beirut tells ABC News, “The Department of State makes you sign a form, and then they tell you the costs after.” > The policy gained some traction as a topic of debate in early September 2017. The practice of charging evacuated Americans can be documented back to at least August 1944 [PDF]. However, U.S. Code Title 22, Chapter 38, Section 2671 pertains to the return of Americans citizens from places outside the United States, not transport of American citizens to other American territories or states. (Puerto Ricans are American citizens.) It is possible the authors of the articles mentioned here received information not cited in the article about the situation in Puerto Rico, but also possible that policy was presumed to be implemented with no information one way or the other. Neither article made clear that evacuation (not dispatched aid) was the primary plan for rebuilding Puerto Rico, but in any case the relevance of the decades-old policy to the situation in the territory is unconfirmed. Notably, the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act [PDF] (a law pertaining to federal response and “natural disaster assistance for state and local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to aid citizens”) defines hurricanes such as Maria as applicable natural disasters and Puerto Rico as part of the United States: < (a) The Congress hereby finds and declares that – (1) because disasters often cause loss of life, human suffering, loss of income, and property loss and damage; and (2) because disasters often disrupt the normal functioning of governments and communities, and adversely affect individuals and families with great severity; special measures, designed to assist the efforts of the affected States in expediting the rendering of aid, assistance, and emergency services, and the reconstruction and rehabilitation of devastated areas, are necessary. It is the intent of the Congress, by this Act, to provide an orderly and continuing means of assistance by the Federal Government to State and local governments in carrying out their responsibilities to alleviate the suffering and damage which result from such disasters by – (1) revising and broadening the scope of existing disaster relief programs … (2) Major Disaster – “Major disaster” means any natural catastrophe (including any hurricane, tornado, storm, high water, winddriven water, tidal wave, tsunami, earthquake, volcanic eruption, landslide, mudslide, snowstorm, or drought), or, regardless of cause, any fire, flood, or explosion, in any part of the United States, which in the determination of the President causes damage of sufficient severity and magnitude to warrant major disaster assistance under this Act to supplement the efforts and available resources of States, local governments, and disaster relief organizations in alleviating the damage, loss, hardship, or suffering caused thereby. (3) “United States” means the fifty States, the District of Columbia, Puerto Rico, the Virgin Islands, Guam, American Samoa, and the Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands. > Although it is true that the Department of State billed evacuees for repatriation as far back as 1944, the Trump administration did not invent the policy. By 29 September 2017, The Hill edited their article to reflect that the claim was in fact false: < The State Department is not requiring anyone evacuated from hurricane-ravaged Puerto Rico to sign promissory notes reimbursing the government for travel costs. Marketwatch reported that the evacuees from Puerto Rico were being required to put up promissory notes under a longstanding policy. The Hill also posted a story based on the Marketwatch report … But the State policy does not apply to the U.S. territory of Puerto Rico, a spokeswoman for the department said. –This report was updated at 2:21 p.m. [on 28 September 2017] >

Anid, Ingrid and Astrid Hill.  “The Price Of Escape.”   ABC News.  19 July 2006.;Bowden, John.  “Trump Administration Forcing Puerto Rico Evacuees To Pay For Airfare: Report.”   The Hill.  28 September 2017.;Dropp, Kyle and Brendan Nyhan.  “Nearly Half Of Americans Don’t Know Puerto Ricans Are Fellow Citizens.”   New York Times.  26 September 2017.;Kilgore, Tomi.  “Mark Cuban, Pitbull Step Up, But Trump Administration Making Puerto Rico Evacuees Pay.”   Marketwatch.  28 September 2017.;U.S, Department of State Consular Affairs.  “Information For Evacuated U.S. Citizens.”   September 2014.;U.S. Code: Title 22, Chapter 38.  “§ 2671 – Emergency Expenditures.”   Accessed 28 September 2017.;Bureau of Consular Affairs, U.S. Department of State.  “Information For Evacuated U.S. Citizens.”   Accessed 28 September 2017.;FEMA.gov.  “Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act.”   Accessed 28 September 2017.

news-north-east-south-west

news-north-east-south-west

David Mikkelson

The word news is an acronym formed from the words north, east, west, and south.

Some explanations are just too simple to accept. The notion that the English word news — that is, information about recent events — is the plural of the word new just doesn’t sound right, so somebody cooked up the notion that the word is an acronym formed from the initial letters of the four cardinal compass points (north, east, west, and south), supposedly because news is information from all over the land. But, in fact, our word ‘news’ is derived from the plural form of ‘new.’ It’s not surprising this explanation sounds a bit odd to us, because new is an adjective and not a noun, so how could it have a plural form? Although adjectives don’t generally have plurals in English, they do in other languages. In some Romance languages, for example, adjectives change to agree in number with the nouns they modify. So, in Spanish a white house is a casa blanca, but white houses are casas blancas. Likewise, in French a tall woman is a grande femme, but tall women are grandes femmes. When nouveau, the French word for new, modifies a plural (feminine) noun, it becomes nouvelles, which is also the French word for news. Not so strange after all.

Rawson, Hugh. Â Devious Derivations. Â Â New York: Crown Trade Paperbacks, 1994. Â ISBN 0-517-88128-4 Â (p. 144).;The Compact Oxford English Dictionary. Â Â Oxford: Clarendon Press, 1993. Â ISBN 0-19-861258-3.

flashlight-app-personal-data-cyber-crime

flashlight-app-personal-data-cyber-crime

David Mikkelson

Flashlight apps harbor furtive code to steal your personal data and send it to foreign cybercriminals.

On 1 October 2014, cybersecurity company SnoopWall released a “threat assessment report” discussing flashlight apps for Android devices and security threats they may pose. Although the report was released to the accompaniment of alarmist news stories about how some flashlight apps could potentially access banking information and cell phone video cameras and send users’ personal information to cybercriminals abroad in India, China, and Russia, the SnoopWall report itself neither stated nor offered evidence that such activity was taking place. That report merely charted the permissions accessed by the top ten Android flashlight apps and offered some tips about “best practices for increasing privacy and security on your device without spending any money.” It is indeed the case that a number of flashlight apps can and do request access to permissions and data on users’ cell phones that seemingly has nothing to do with the ordinary functioning of the app, and that such permissions could theoretically enable criminals to obtain sensitive personal information from cell phone users. However: As the Daily Dot observed of the hysteria generated by SnoopWall’s report, it all appeared to be part of a calculated fear-driven marketing ploy for SnoopWall’s own products: < It all sounds pretty scary, but before you go culling your flashlight apps in one massive purge you should know that there’s very little to fear. While SnoopWall’s report makes things sound pretty dire, the company offers no actual proof that these apps are a threat to your personal security or — in the worst possible case — a danger to national security. Not one single shred of evidence is presented to support the company’s claims because none actually exists. SnoopWall itself has been pushing its own flashlight app (as a replacement for all the ones that are trying to overthrow the U.S. government, naturally) and the oddly named Privacy App which is designed to highlight any other apps on your Android device that are a security risk and could do you harm. The end goal here is to score licensing deals with app makers to include the company’s Privacy Shield software in their own apps. Just like the flashlight apps using you as ad fodder, SnoopWall wants your support which it can leverage in order to pay the bills. Companies need paychecks too, after all. But that’s not the only thing that appears a bit hypocritical about SnoopWall’s agressive attack against “dishonest” app developers. In researching SnoopWall’s generically named Privacy App I found that users almost universally agree that the app simply doesn’t work. While the app promises to “find all the apps that are spying on you,” the user reviews suggest it’s not doing much good. The entire front page of the app’s Google Play listing is filled with reviews saying that the app produces nothing but false positives > SnoopWall’s “threat assessment report” suggested that flashlight apps are more prone to requesting access to unneeded permissions and data than any other category of app, but as Wired noted, many other types of apps “want access to information they probably shouldn’t,” and the fact that a given app has access to data doesn’t necessarily mean the app is actually stealing that data and transmitting it to internatonal cybercriminals. It may be the case, though, that you’re paying for your “free” app by unwittingly allowing your personal data to be shared with marketers: < The Flashlight app on my phone is built by a company called iHandy. [A] mobile phone security operation called Appthority did an analysis of the data that Flashlight can potentially request, and it’s pretty scary. According to Appthority’s president, Domingo Guerra, Flashlight is designed to do location tracking, read my calendar, use my camera, gain access to unique numbers that identify my phone, and then share data with a number of ad networks, including Google’s AdMob, iAd, and JumpTap. It may not actually be doing all of these things — Appthority’s analysis only shows what the software is capable of, not necessarily what it’s actually up to — but the fact that there’s such an arsenal of dubious uses should raise eyebrows. On my phone, several apps want access to information they probably shouldn’t, and odds are, that’s the case with your phone, too. The lesson here is that when it comes to mobile software, there’s really no such thing as a free app. > All in all, as the Guardian noted, “developers are often asking for far greater power over a user’s device, in order to collect data and sell it on to marketers and ad networks. It’s the latest reminder that if you’re not paying for an app, its business model may well involve selling your data.” Or, as Jeff Werner of the Northwest Florida Daily News observed: < Personally, I’m inclined to believe that there are apps out there that are sending personal data to places where that data has no business going, [but] I would be surprised if it was limited to flashlight apps. At the end of the day, it’s important for you to make your own decisions. Be informed, but don’t believe every last thing you see or read on the Internet. When it comes to your smartphone, because of the unique nature of the data it contains, and the sites that many of us access with it, be very careful which apps you choose to install. The fewer apps you select, and the more mainstream they are, the less vulnerable you will be to theft of your data. > One flashlight app developer, Goldenshores Technologies (makers of the “Brightest Flashlight” app for Android), settled a complaint with the FTC in 2014 over their collecting location data and unique device IDs from users’ devices and sharing that data with advertisers. So when it comes to apps — even “free ones” — caveat emptor.

Davis, Gary.  “Flashlight App Steals Data, Leaves Users in Dark.”   McAfee Blog Central.  9 December 2013.;Fox-Brewster, Tom.  “Check the Permissions: Android Flashlight Apps Criticised Over Privacy.”   The Guardian.  3 October 2014.;Hayes, Jessica.  “Smartphone Apps Could Spy on Users.”   WISH-TV [Indianapolis].  23 October 2014.;McMillan, Robert.  “The Hidden Privacy Threat of … Flashlight Apps?”   Wired.  21 October 2014.;Werner, Jeff.  “Flashlight App Malware Could Be More Prevalent Than Originally Thought.”   Northwest Florida Daily News.  30 January 2015.;Wehner, Mike.  “A Closer Look at the Company Behind Flashlight App Fear-Mongering.”   The Daily Dot.  31 October 2014.

alec-baldwin-arrested-trump

alec-baldwin-arrested-trump

The United States Secret Service arrested Alec Baldwin for threatening President Donald Trump at the 2017 Emmy Awards.

On 18 September 2017, the satirical web site As American As Apple Pie reported that actor Alec Baldwin had been arrested at the 2017 Emmy Awards for threatening President Donald Trump: < The Secret Service was forced to remove Alec Baldwin from the Emmys in Los Angeles Sunday night after he threatened to “use his influence to get close to Trump and then slit his throat.” Baldwin, whose mic was still hot in the sound booth at the time, put up quite a fight: “Mr Baldwin doesn’t reaslize [sic] the severity of this situation. He voiced a credible threat to the President of the United States. There are consequences for that.” Baldwin is being held for questioning at the federal holding facility at Los Alamada del Ray. We will update this developing story as more information is available. > Alec Baldwin did attend the Emmy Awards on 17 September 2017, and won Outstanding Supporting Actor in a Comedy Series for his portrayal of Trump on Saturday Night Live. However, he did not make any threat against the President and was not arrested. As American As Apple Pie is a satirical, fake news web site which publishes exclusively fake content, and alludes to its own unreliability in this tongue-in-cheek disclaimer: < When no one can trust the lying fake news liberal media anymore because they hate us and guns and Harley Davidson and meat and OUR president, As American as Apple Pie is here to be your beacon of something you can kinda rely on sometimes, but not really. God Bless America and Amen. > Other stories that have taken in readers of the site include claims that a Muslim mayor outlawed Christmas in 2017, and that a Muslim federal judge had ruled that two items of sharia law were now considered legal in the United States. Neither story had any truth to them whatsoever.

crowds-on-demand

crowds-on-demand

In August 2017, a California crowd hire company provided actors for protests against a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.

On 14 August 2017, a Craigslist job advertisement began to spread on social media and chat forums like Reddit and 4Chan. The ad, which had appeared a week earlier, appeared to offer up to $25 an hour to applicants willing to form part of a crowd for events in Charlotte, North Carolina: < Crowds on Demand, a Los Angeles-based Public Relations firm specializing in innovative events, is looking for enthusiastic actors and photographers in the Charlotte, NC area to participate in our events. Our events include everything from rallies to protests to corporate PR stunts to celebrity scenes. > The Craigslist posting quickly led to speculation that Crowds on Demand was involved in providing actors to take part in either a white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia on 12 August 2017, a counter-protest in the same location, or demonstrations against the Charlottesville rally in various cities. (An anti-racist “Vigil for Charlottesville” took place at Marshall Park in Charlotte, North Carolina the day after the “Unite the Right” rally.) We asked Crowds on Demand whether they posted the Craigslist ad or if they were involved in recruiting actors for the Charlottesville rally or counter-protest, or any other demonstrations held in other cities in response to the “Unite the Right” event. In a statement, the company’s CEO Adam Swart denied any involvement in the rally and counter-protest in Charlottesville, but did not rule out their possible involvement in other related events: < We were not involved in any capacity with the recent tragic events in Charlottesville, Virginia. Our thoughts and prayers are with the families of those impacted by the violence. > In a phone conversation, Swart also told us that while Crowds on Demand is not a politically partisan company, and provides its services to any political party, they “don’t work with hate groups.” When asked if the company would provide actors for protests against hate groups, Swart did not give a direct answer — but did say they do not put actors into situations that might prove dangerous for them. On 15 August 2017, the original Craigslist ad was temporarily withdrawn and “held for review” by the website before being restored. When asked whether Crowds on Demand had been involved in the ad’s temporary removal from the web site, Swart declined to comment. Indivisible Charlotte, the main organizing group behind the Charlotte, North Carolina vigil held in response to the Charlottesville, Virginia white supremacist rally denied using Crowds on Demand for the 13 August 2017 event. Scott Huffman, a founder of the Charlotte branch of the nationwide anti-Trump movement Indivisible, told us he was unaware of the ad’s existence until we shared it with him. < I’m a little taken aback by this… Indivisible Charlotte did not request or hire or pay anybody for appearing. > Furthermore, Huffman said the “Vigil for Charlottesville” was only planned a day in advance in response to the events of 12 August, during which a woman was killed and several others injured after a car attack on anti-white supremacist protesters in Charlottesville. He pointed to a Facebook event announcement he posted on the Indivisible Charlotte page at 6.10pm on 12 August 2017, just over 24 hours before the vigil itself. Conclusion Crowds on Demand denies providing actors for any gathering in Charlottesville, Virginia on 12 August 2017, but did not comment on whether they were involved in subsequent protests held in response to the “Unite the Right” rally. The organizers of the Charlotte, North Carolina vigil on 13 August strongly denied using the services of Crowds on Demand, and it seems somewhat implausible that they did given the fact that the Craigslist ad was posted on 7 August 2017 and Indivisible Charlotte announced their vigil just 24 hours in advance. It is also unclear who posted the Craigslist ad. The chief executive officer of Crowds on Demand refused to comment on whether his company posted it, for what purpose, or whether they were later responsible for having it temporarily removed. In the absence of a bilateral denial of the crowd hire company’s involvement, we cannot definitively say that Crowds on Demand were not involved in anti-white supremacist demonstrations in Charlotte, North Carolina, or elsewhere, during the weekend of 12 and 13 August 2017.Â

hobby-lobby-cotton

hobby-lobby-cotton

Hobby Lobby came "under fire" by liberals for using cotton in their home decor products.

In September 2017, social media users voiced their offense at rumors that “liberals” were organizing a boycott over Hobby Lobby’s cotton decor products because the items were purportedly offensive to black people: < VIRAL:Insane Liberals Claim Hobby Lobby Sells Racist Decor of fake cotton buds on branches How can this be stopped?https://t.co/SVvQeJywpq — Deplorable Linda G. (@GartrellLinda) September 18, 2017 > < Help is on the way for people that were offended by Hobby Lobby’s ‘offensive’ cotton decoration. Don’t forget to send me your paper currency pic.twitter.com/u0ON7QPAkD — MAGAmike (@jmsb1955) September 18, 2017 > According to tweets and Facebook posts, “liberals” were “organizing a boycott” against Hobby Lobby, and the chain had come “under fire” over a cotton stalk home decor product sold by the company. Images included with those posts furthered the impression that large groups of people were protesting Hobby Lobby and the cotton decor products: < Riots About To Erupt At Hobby Lobby After Racist Thugs Find Out What’s Now Being Sold In Their Stores Over the weekend, liberals lost their minds after seeing what the conservative craft store Hobby Lobby had on their shelves. No, it was not a depiction of violence or even a vile sexual scene it was a vase full of well, raw cotton. Yes, that is what has pushed the left over the edge after the “disturbing” image of raw cotton was posted on Facebook. Apparently, now selling cotton as a decoration is racist and must be removed from Hobby Lobby’s shelves immediately. If you think this is a joke it isn’t and sadly it shows exactly where we are as a country. Over the last several years, the left has been doing all they can to divide the country and it has worked. Now everyone is a racist if you don’t agree with them, white men are sexists, and all President Trump supporters are white supremacists. Seriously, Alice’s Wonderland makes more sense than these liberals running amuck in America, however, this is the world we live in. Which is why what happened in Hobby Lobby over the weekend really doesn’t surprise anyone. Wow, talk about ungrateful! > On 20 September 2017, the Killeen Daily Herald interviewed Ridell about the social media controversy. She stated that her post was intended as a “message as a consumer to a retailer” and added that she began receiving “rude” messages, threats, and racial epithets from other social media users presumably offended by her post: < Rider, 38, said she shops at Hobby Lobby because she loves crafting, but had never seen the raw cotton displayed as a decoration. “It shocked me,” she said. “I was just taken aback by it because I had never seen it before.” Rider said she at first posted the picture of the cotton on her personal Facebook page. “Then, the more I thought about it, I thought, well I’m a consumer and it’s a décor that I don’t agree with,” Rider said about her decision to also put the post on Hobby Lobby’s Facebook page, where it went viral. [Soon] it had about 295,000 comments, 106,000 reactions such as likes, and more than 22,000 shares. She started getting rude posts on her Facebook page and her messenger inbox exploded with comments. “I started to try to respond to a few of them, but then I realized that people weren’t wanting to have a conversation about it; they were just wanting to tell me how they feel, as mean as possible,” Rider said. Rider said she has received death threats of people saying they want to “cut her head off,” and many calling her the “N-word.” Rider said she has read and re-read her post to see where she offended a specific person or race and did not find anything. “I didn’t attack anyone … Everyone is entitled to their opinion. Sometimes it is OK to agree to disagree, but division comes through hate,” Rider said, adding she was still kind to everyone who sent her hate mail. > Rider sounded sincere about her Hobby Lobby cotton decor complaint, but she also identified herself as an individual speaking solely on her own behalf. We were unable to find any indication that any group (“liberal” or otherwise) took similar offense, that any person or group had organized a boycott against Hobby Lobby over the issue, or that anything other than Rider’s single Facebook post suggested the chain was “under fire” over the cotton stalks. The vast bulk of social media commenters expressing offense were directing their ire at Rider’s remarks, not at Hobby Lobby.

Watson, Jennifer.  “Killeen Woman Who Posted About Hobby Lobby Cotton Speaks Out.”   Killeen Daily Herald.  20 September 2017.

"fukushima" AND "officials" AND "never" AND "eat" AND "pacific" AND "fish"
"fukushima" AND "ocean" AND "radioactive"

fukushima-officials-never-eat-pacific-fish-again

fukushima-officials-never-eat-pacific-fish-again

Fukushima scientists have warned that fish in the Pacific Ocean will never again be safe for human consumption due to radioactive contamination

On 5 August 2017, the conspiracy-peddling website Your News Wire published a story — devoid of any citations or named sources — with the headline “Fukushima Officials: Humans Should Never Eat Fish Again.”  “Fukushima scientists,” the writer claims, have concluded that “the days of eating fish from the Pacific ocean are well and truly over” thanks to widespread contamination from the 2011 tsunami and resulting nuclear disaster: < According to one scientist, TEPCO [Tokyo Electric Power Company], the company in charge of monitoring the plant, has data that shows radiation pouring into the Pacific Ocean non-stop for the past six years. According to other scientists who have examined the radiation levels of fish in the ocean, the days of “eating fish from the Pacific ocean are over”. > If the phrase “your days of eating fish from the Pacific Ocean are over” sounds familiar, it’s because this quote has been used in a variety of fear-mongering posts related to Fukushima since 2013. The claim doesn’t originate with a scientist, but with a man named Gary Stamper, who wrote an opinion piece for the Collapsing into Consciousness blog — a web site and forum devoted to issues surrounding the collapse of civilization. Many of the claims made in the Stamper piece stem from fears and media reports generated by a 5 August 2013 admission from TEPCO that waters leaking from Fukushima reactors into the Pacific were more radioactive than previously reported. However, most of the claims in this post are overblown or outright false, and assertions of a connection between animal die-offs and Fukushima radiation remain unsubstantiated.  Your News Wire then continues into another unsourced section of vague, largely inaccurate, and wholly out-of-date information about radiation leaking from the reactor: < The contaminated water is believed to contain traces of radioactive iodine, cesium, and strontium-89 and 90. Despite efforts from the Japanese government to bring the problem under control, the fish have been saturated by the continuous radiation being pumped into the ocean. The contamination has also resulted in the closure of fishing industries. Worryingly, new studies reveal that fish caught off the West coast of the United States and in Canada are also testing positive for radiation poisoning. > This contamination was substantial, and its effects were later detected in western North America. However, claims that this contamination has been continuing at the same rate into the present are incorrect, according to director of the Woods Hole Oceanographic Institution Center for Marine and Environmental Radioactivity, who spoke to PBS Newshour in 2016 about this very topic: < More than 80 percent of the radioactivity from the damaged reactors ended up in the Pacific — far more than reached the ocean from Chernobyl or Three Mile Island. Of this, a small fraction is currently on the seafloor — the rest was swept up by the Kuroshio current, a western Pacific version of the Gulf Stream, and carried out to sea where it mixed with (and was diluted by) the vast volume of the North Pacific. These materials, primarily two isotopes of cesium, only recently began to appear in the eastern Pacific: In 2015 we detected signs of radioactive contamination from Fukushima along the coast near British Columbia and California. […] These signs, and the many more signs from samples we’ve collected on both sides of the Pacific, show that releases have continued, but that at current rates, it would take 5,000 years to equal the amount of cesium released in the accident’s first few months. > As we have written about in detail, it is technically accurate to say that radiation tied to Fukushima has been detected in at least one salmon found in 2015 in Washington state. This fish had an unambiguous chemical marker linking it to the Fukushima reactor. However the level of radiation detected was equal to or less than the amount of radiation found naturally in any fish in the Pacific Ocean, and was therefore not indicative of a direct health risk. We rate this claim as false because it misrepresents a questionable blog post as a scientific investigation in order to use a flashy quote, and further challenges credibility by mixing together a variety of out-of-date themes based on blog posts from four years before.

Adl-Tabatabai, Sean.  “Fukushima Officials: Humans Should Never Eat Fish Again.”   Your News Wire.  5 August 2017.;Stamper, Gary.  “At the Very Least, Your Days of Eating Pacific Ocean Fish Are Over.”   Collapsing into Consciousness.  5 August 2017.;TEPCO PR.  “Fukushima Daiichi NPS Prompt Report 2013”   5 August 2013.;Buesseler, Ken.  “5 Years Later, Fukushima Radiation Continues to Seep Into the Pacific Ocean.”   PBS Newshour.  9 March 2016.;Kellogg, Jonathan.   “Pushing the Limit: Fukushima Fingerprint Isotope Found in Salmon from 2015.”;fukushimainform.ca.   15 November 2016.;Povinec, Pavel, P., and Hirose, Katsumi.   “Fukushima Radionuclides in the Nw Pacific, and Assessment of Doses for Japanese and World Population from Ingestion of Seafood.”;Scientific Reports.   12 March 2015.;Rothschild, Mike.  “Are Your Days of Eating Pacific Ocean Fish Really Over?”   Skeptoid.  2 September 2013.

leland-melvin-pen-open-letter-donald-trump

leland-melvin-pen-open-letter-donald-trump

Questionable Quotes

Astronaut and former NFL player Leland Melvin wrote an open letter to Donald Trump concerning the President's comments about the "Take a Knee" protest.

CORRECT ATTRIBUTION

As tensions rose in September 2017 in response to football players’ protesting police brutality and inequality by kneeling during the U.S. national anthem, astronaut and former football player Leland Melvin jumped into the fray with a lengthy open letter to president Donald Trump. During a September speech in Alabama, Trump had called for a boycott of the National Football League (NFL), saying: < Wouldn’t you love one of the NFL owners when someone disrespects our flag, ‘get that son of a bitch off the field right now’ . . . If you see it, leave the stadium, I guarantee things will stop. > Trump’s words heightened emotions on both sides of the issue, but for athletes and team owners, it seemed to heighten solidarity and even spread the protest to as quarterback Tom Brady and National Basketball Association players Steph Curry and Lebron James spoke out against Trump. Amidst all this, a lengthy open letter to the President purportedly penned by astronaut and former NFL Player Leland Melvin came to light: < To Donald Trump I believe in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of this country even though at the time they were drafted, their tenets of life, liberty justice for all and eventual freedom of speech, religion, assembly, press and petition amendment ratified in Dec 1791, only applied to a select group of people and not ones that looked like me. Donald Trump I listened to your Alabama rally rant and could not believe how easily you say what you say. We have become numb to your outlandish acts, tweets and recent retweet of you knocking down Hillary Clinton with a golf ball that you hit. Donald Trump your boorish and disgusting actions are not funny. They actually promote violence against women especially when your followers act out what you say. I used to walk the grounds of UVA in Charlottesville, VA as a graduate student only to watch in horror as those same grounds became a battlefield being trod by Nazi and anti-Semitic worshippers armed with assault style weapons ready to fight to make America White again. (their words). You actually said there were nice people on both sides. People armed and ready to kill other Americans for the purpose of eradicating Blacks, Jews, Hispanics, Mexicans, Asians, Latinas and even the first real Americans, Native Americans to make America Great Again were “nice people”? Verses what you say in condemnation of an unarmed black man peacefully protesting by exercising his constitutional First Amendment rights by silently taking a knee is appalling, unnerving and reprehensible. You called Colin Kaepernick “a son-of-a-bitch.” And said he should be fired. You are basically calling his white mother a bitch. The strong contrast in language for a black man and a Nazi is very telling. Do you have any sense of decency or shame in what you say to the American people that are part of your duty to serve respectfully with dignity, presidentially? The National Anthem that we listen too has been edited to try not to offend because when Francis Scott Key penned the song he watched freed slaves fighting for the British and wrote this stanza: “And where is that band who so vauntingly swore, That the havoc of war and the battle’s confusion A home and a Country should leave us no more? Their blood has wash’d out their foul footstep’s pollution. No refuge could save the hireling and slave From the terror of flight or the gloom of the grave, And the star-spangled banner in triumph doth wave O’er the land of the free and the home of the brave.” I guess if I were a slave back then I probably would have done anything to obtain freedom from my American oppressors who were whipping, killing, raping, dismembering, hanging or releasing the dogs on people like me all under our Constitution. In 1814 former slaves fought with the British for their freedom from their American enslavers and Key witnessed a battle from a ship off the Maryland shore at Fort McHenry which inspired him to write what became our National Anthem. I served my country not in the military but as 1 of 362 American Astronauts that have explored the universe to help advance our civilization. Not just Americans but all humans. I also was briefly in the NFL and stood for the National Anthem with my hand over my heart. What makes us great is our differences and respecting that we are all created equally even if not always treated that way. Looking back at our planet from space really helps one get a bigger perspective on how petty and divisive we can be. Donald Trump maybe you should ask your good friend Mr. Putin to give you a ride on a Soyuz rocket to our International Space Station and see what it’s like to work together with people we used to fight against, where your life depends on it. See the world and get a greater sense of what it means to be part of the human race, we call it the Orbital Perspective. Donald Trump please know that you are supposed to be a unifier and a compassionate and empathetic leader. If you can’t do the job then please step down and let someone else try. I pray that you do the right thing. May God bless you. Sincerely, Leland Melvin Former Astronaut and NFL Player > It’s unclear why this particular response was met with skepticism, but several readers wrote in to ask us if the letter was authentic. It’s possible that many were unfamiliar with Melvin. Some may have also questioned the authenticity of the national anthem stanza mentioned by the former NFL Player (it is indeed part of the song). The length of Melvin’s post, which was significantly longer than most of the other responses that circulated on social media, may have also raised some doubts. However, this open letter was truly written by Leland Melvin. It was originally posted to his Facebook page on 23 September 2017: < To @realDonaldTrump I believe in the Declaration of Independence and the Constitution of this country even… https://t.co/FezF6vqZuO pic.twitter.com/VUGdZa7lL0 — Leland Melvin (@Astro_Flow) September 23, 2017 > Â

Belson, Ken.  “Trump Attacks Warriors’ Curry. LeBron James’s Retort: ‘U Bum.’”   New York Times.  23 September 2017.;Wright, David.  “Tom Brady Calls Trump’s Comments ‘Divisive,’ Backs Protests.”   CNN.  25 September 2017.;Jacobs, Ben.  “Kim Jong-un, the NFL and ‘Screaming at Senators’: Trump’s Strange Night in Alabama.”   The Guardian.  23 September 2017.

"scientific" AND "papers" AND "global" AND "warming" AND "myth" AND "58"

scientific-papers-global-warming-myth

scientific-papers-global-warming-myth

A total of 58 peer-reviewed papers published in the first half of 2017 conclude that global warming is a myth.

On 6 June 2017, Breitbart News ran an article titled “‘Global Warming’ Is a Myth, Say 58 Scientific Papers in 2017”. This article, which is in essence merely a link to a post from a blog that goes by the name “No Tricks Zone” and some added musings on “grant-troughing scientists,” “huxter politicians,” “scaremongering green activists,” and “brainwashed mainstream media environmental correspondents,” claims that this ragtag collection of studies proves that the long-standing scientific consensus on climate change is nothing but a myth. The blog post Breitbart linked to is a list of 80 graphs (so many graphs!) taken from 58 studies. The analysis of the findings presented by No Tricks Zone is crude, misinformed, and riddled with errors. The basic thesis presented by No Tricks Zone is that these graphs, which are inferred records of things like temperature and precipitation from specific localities through time, show that the climatological changes happening right now are neither dramatic nor man made. The charts highlight times from the somewhat recent pre-industrial past that were either warmer or more dramatically variable then they are now, or show evidence of change attributed to clear natural causes. As Breitbart puts it: < What all these papers argue in their different ways is that the alarmist version of global warming — aka Catastrophic Anthropogenic Global Warming (CAGW) — is a fake artefact. > This is false. We reached out to many of the authors of the studies included on this list via email to see if they agreed with Breitbart and No Tricks Zone’s analysis. While not everyone we reached out to responded, not a single researcher that we spoke to agreed with Breitbart’s assessment, and most were shocked when we told them that their work was presented as evidence for that claim. A representative response came from Paul Mayewski, author of one of the studies included on the No Tricks Zone list and director of the University of Maine’s Climate Change Institute: < They are absolutely incorrect!!!! Quite the opposite, the paper deals with the impacts of greenhouse gas warming and Antarctic ozone depletion — both human caused — and describes future scenarios. Yet another example of downright lies. > Outside of the fact that all of these papers have squiggly lines that represent climatological change through time, they cover a diverse range of highly technical topics and have little in common with each other. In many cases, listed studies are applicable only to a very specific region and were created not to investigate the influence of humans on climate, but to understand how the climate system works in general. This was the case for University of Washington PhD candidate Bradley Markle, whose paper (“Global Atmospheric Teleconnections During Dansgaard-Oeschger Events”) was also included in the No Tricks Zone: < My study, and almost all I saw mentioned on the blog post, are studies of climate change in the past. My study investigates connections between different parts of the climate system during climate events that happened over 10,000 years ago. Studying climate change in the past can provide context for recent climate change. However, my study in no way investigates or tries to attribute the causes of recent climate change. It does not deal with human influences on climate at all. > This echoes the response of USGS research scientist Julie Richey, whose paper (“Multi-Species Coral Sr/Ca-based Sea-Surface Temperature Reconstruction Using Orbicella Faveolata and Siderastrea Siderea from the Florida Straits”) really resonated with the Breitbart science desk: < Our paper presents a 280-year sea surface temperature record based on the ratio of strontium to calcium in corals we sampled in the Dry Tortugas National Park. It shows that sea surface temperatures measured over many decades in the Florida Straits are variable, and that variation has been dominated for nearly the past three centuries by a natural oscillation called the Atlantic Multidecadal Oscillation. […] Neither of these findings refutes the role of anthropogenic activity in global climate change. > Many researchers told us that, even by the crude metrics of the No Tricks Zone post, and even without intending to address anthropogenic climate change in their research, their papers’ data actually support anthropogenically driven recent warming. This was the case for Claremont McKenna professor Branwen Williams, whose paper (“North Pacific 20th Century Decadal-Scale Variability Is Unique for the Past 342 Years”) was featured: < I do not agree with this assessment of my work. The seawater temperature data clearly show a warming. > In other cases it appears that the analysis provided by the author of the No Tricks Zone post was so superficial that the graphs pulled from some studies were not actually part of any new dataset, but comparison datasets from earlier studies. Geologist Fatima Abrantes’ paper “Historical Climate off the Atlantic Iberian Peninsula” fell victim to this oversight: < The article on Breitbart.com is so bad that the author did not even realize that the figure extracted from my paper is not my new data record but the record of the northern Spain atmospheric temperature anomaly, produced by [another group in 2011] that I have used for comparison. […] [Our] results agree with both the global and regional projections that indicate this region of Europe with highest potential vulnerability in regard to current global warming. > These charts, when accurately cited, provide ammunition against two clearly false straw man arguments invented by No Tricks Zone: 1) That climatic change happens in concert and in the same way uniformly around the globe, and that 2) evidence of any natural force influencing climate is — at the same time — also evidence against the notion that humans are playing a role in current climatic change. The fact that the 1257 Samalas eruption altered grape harvests, as one study in the post demonstrated, does not mean humans cannot also alter climate, as the No Trick Zone post implied. We rank the claims made by both Breitbart and No Tricks Zone as false, because they dramatically misrepresent the findings of the scientists who conducted the research and utilize poorly-articulated straw man arguments to further misrepresent the significance of the work of those scientists. These studies were local in nature, narrow in scope, meant to address how the climate system functioned in the past, and pose no threat to the tenets of anthropogenic climate change. Global warming, as implied by the name, is a global process. That does not, however, mean that every part of the globe reacts to this process in the same way or at the same rate, or even at all. Richey, the author of the USGS Florida sea-surface temperature record, succinctly described this fallacy: < Anthropogenic climate change is characterized by variable climate responses across the globe. No climate record taken at a single point in space is representative of the global climate. >

Delingpole, James.  “‘Global Warming’ Is a Myth, Say 58 Scientific Papers in 2017.”   Breitbart News.  6 June 2017.;Richard, Kenneth.  “80 Graphs From 58 New (2017) Papers Invalidate Claims Of Unprecedented Global-Scale Modern Warming.”   NoTricksZone.  29 May 2017.;Mayewski, P.A., et al.  “Ice Core and Climate Reanalysis Analogs to Predict Antarctic and Southern Hemisphere Climate Changes.”   Quaternary Science Reviews.  1 January 2017.;Flannery, Jennifer, A., et al.  “Multi-species Coral Sr/Ca Based Sea-surface Temperature Reconstruction Using Orbicella Faveolata and Siderastrea Siderea from the Florida Straits”   Palaeogeography Palaeoclimatology Palaeoecology.  20 October 2016.;William, Branwen, et al.  “North Pacific Twentieth Century Decadal-Scale Variability Is Unique for the Past 342 Years.”   Geophysical Research Letters.  24 April 2017.;Abrantes, Fatima, et al.  “Historical Climate off the Atlantic Iberian Peninsula.”   Geophysical Research Letters.  16 March 2017.;Guillet, Sebastien, et al.  “Climate Response to the Samalas Volcanic Eruption in 1257 Revealed by Proxy Records”   Nature Geoscience.  23 January 2017.

fonda-vietnam-pow-captor-trip

fonda-vietnam-pow-captor-trip

David Mikkelson

During a trip to North Vietnam, Jane Fonda turned smuggled messages from U.S. POWs over to their captors.

It is perhaps indicative of the divisive nature of U.S. military involvement in the Vietnam War in the 1960s and 70s that one of the persons most commonly associated with the war was neither a world leader nor a politician, neither a general nor a soldier, neither a participant nor a casualty of the war, but an American actress. And in ironic fashion, that actress is most notorious for something she didn’t do in Vietnam rather than all the things she did do. In July 1972, during the waning days of U.S. military involvement in Vietnam, actress Jane Fonda incurred the enmity of untold thousands of Vietnam veterans and their families (as well as service members for generations to come) when she arrived in Hanoi, North Vietnam, and began a two-week tour of the country. Fonda visited North Vietnamese villages, hospitals, schools, and factories damaged in the war, weaving her comments about what she observed at those sites with denunciations of U.S. military policy in recordings broadcast as propaganda to U.S. servicemen via Radio Hanoi; met with international visitors and reporters who were also in North Vietnam; spent about an hour chatting with seven U.S. POWs at a meeting arranged by her North Vietnamese guides; and posed for photographs at an antiaircraft emplacement set up in a rural area just outside Hanoi: < She went to tour the country’s dike system, which was rumored to have been intentionally bombed by American forces — something the U.S. government to this day forcefully denies. During her two-week stay, Fonda concluded that America was unjustly bombing farmland and areas far flung from military targets. North Vietnamese press reported — and Fonda later confirmed — that she made several radio announcements over the Voice of Vietnam radio to implore U.S. pilots to stop the bombings. “I appealed to them to please consider what you are doing. I don’t think they know,” Fonda said in a news conference when she returned home. “The people who are speaking out against the war are the patriots.” She said the radio addresses were the only way to get access to American soldiers, because she was barred from meeting them at their bases in South Vietnam. > Although Fonda’s actions in visiting North Vietnam were sufficient to earn her the wrath of many Americans, in the years since those events took place they have been embellished to the point that the one tale most commonly associated with her Vietnam trip is an incident that never took place — a tale about U.S. POWs who furtively slipped messages to Fonda while she was meeting with them and whom Fonda promptly betrayed by turning those messages over to the POWs’ North Vietnamese captors (resulting in several of those prisoners’ being beaten, tortured, or killed): < “There are few things I have strong visceral reactions to, but Jane Fonda’s participation in what I believe to be blatant treason, is one of them. Part of my conviction comes from exposure to those who suffered her attentions. “In 1978, the Commandant of the USAF Survival School, a colonel, was a former POW in Ho Lo Prison — the Hanoi Hilton. Dragged from a stinking cesspit of a cell, cleaned, fed, and dressed in clean PJs, he was ordered to describe for a visiting American ‘Peace Activist’ the ‘lenient and humane treatment’ he’d received. He spat at Ms. Fonda, was clubbed, and dragged away. During the subsequent beating, he fell forward upon the camp Commandant’s feet, accidentally pulling the man’s shoe off — which sent that officer berserk. “In ’78, the AF colonel still suffered from double vision — permanently grounding him — from the Vietnamese officer’s frenzied application of a wooden baton. “From 1983-85, Col. Larry Carrigan was 347FW/DO (F-4Es). He’d spent 6 [product] years in the Hilton — the first three of which he was listed as MIA. His wife lived on faith that he was still alive. His group, too, got the cleaned/fed/clothed routine in preparation for a ‘peace delegation’ visit. “They, however, had time and devised a plan to get word to the world that they still survived. Each man secreted a tiny piece of paper, with his Social Security number on it, in the palm of his hand. When paraded before Ms. Fonda and a cameraman, she walked the line, shaking each man’s hand and asking little encouraging snippets like, ‘Aren’t you sorry you bombed babies?’ and, ‘Are you grateful for the humane treatment from your benevolent captors?'” “Believing this HAD to be an act, they each palmed her their sliver of paper. She took them all without missing a beat. At the end of the line and once the camera stopped rolling, to the shocked disbelief of the POWs, she turned to the officer in charge … and handed him the little pile of notes. “Three men died from the subsequent beatings. Col. Carrigan was almost number four. “For years after their release, a group of determined former POWs, including Col. Carrigan, tried to bring Ms. Fonda and others up on charges of treason. I don’t know that they used it, but the charge of ‘Negligent Homicide due to Depraved Indifference’ would also seem appropriate. Her obvious ‘granting of aid and comfort to the enemy’ alone should’ve been sufficient for the treason count. However, to date, Jane Fonda has never been formally charged with anything and continues to enjoy the privileged life of the rich and famous. “I, personally, think that this is shame on us, the American Citizenry. “Part of our shortfall is ignorance: Most don’t know such actions ever took place. “The only addition I might add to these sentiments is to remember the satisfaction of relieving myself into the urinal at some air base or another where ‘zaps’ of Hanoi Jane’s face had been applied.” > The facts are that while in North Vietnam, Fonda met with only a single group of seven U.S POWs: all seven of those POWs agreed to meet with her, no POWs were tortured for declining to meet with her (or for behaving inappropriately during the meeting), and no POWs secretly slipped Fonda messages which she turned over to the North Vietnamese. The persons named in inflammatory claims about this alleged incident have repeatedly and categorically denied the events they supposedly were part of. First of all, the whole premise on which this tale is based is contradicted by the plain reality of the situation: none of the POWs Jane Fonda met needed to furtively hand her messages encoding their identities in order to “get word to the world that they still survived.” Fonda spent about an hour talking with a single group of seven POWs whose names she had ample opportunity to learn during that time; the POWs didn’t need to sneak Fonda pieces of paper with their Social Security numbers written on them, as she could simply have remembered their names and repeated them once she returned home. Plus, there was no reason for the POWs’ identities to have been kept a secret in the first place — since the North Vietnamese arranged the meeting between Fonda and the POWs for its propaganda value, they very much wanted the American public and the world at large to know exactly whom she’d met with. The POWs also had no need to rely on Fonda to secretly relay other messages from them to the outside world. After politics disrupted the delivery of letters to and from American POWs in North Vietnam via U.S. Mail, many visitors who traveled to Hanoi during the war years (such as members of the group Women Strike for Peace) regularly brought POWs letters from their families and took letters from POWs back to the United States with them. Jane Fonda was no exception: she brought mail for imprisoned U.S. servicemen with her to Hanoi, and she returned to the U.S. carrying 241 letters from American POWs back to their families. (Fonda even called the wives of some of the men she met with to provide them with updates about their husbands.) None of the POWs who met with Jane Fonda had any need to resort to the form of subterfuge claimed in these Internet rumors in order to get information about themselves carried to friends and family back home. Additionally, no POWs were tortured to coerce them into meeting with Jane Fonda or for refusing to do so. Fonda had only a single meeting with a small group of POWs, and there were plenty of volunteers for the occasion: < The seven men who met with [Fonda] were not coerced into the meeting; indeed, many more pilots wanted to meet with her than were able. “The entire camp that I was in when Jane Fonda visited wanted to see her,” former POW Edison Miller said, although he didn’t even know who Jane Fonda was. Miller only wanted to see her because he knew she was Henry Fonda’s daughter. The seven POWs and Fonda met around a large table surrounded by chairs. It was a typical meeting between international visitors and American airmen: low-key, filled with small talk, inquiries from the airmen about particular bits of news and sports from home, conversations about their families, requests to call them and pass on a message. > Despite the claims of hundreds of Vietnam veterans who maintain they were “there” and affirm that accounts like the “smuggled Social Security number betrayal” are true because they supposedly witnessed them, the fact is that Fonda met only seven American POWs while in North Vietnam: Edison Miller, Walter Wilber, James Padgett, David Wesley Hoffman, Kenneth James Fraser, William G. Byrns, and Edward Elias. None of those men reported her sabotaging their attempts to slip her information about themselves, and anyone other than those seven men who asserts he was “there” and witnessed such a scene is simply not telling the truth. Some of the POWs who actually did meet with Jane Fonda, such as Edison Miller, have spoken out on the record over the years to disclaim the apocryphal stories about her < “The whole [e-mail] story about Jane Fonda is just malarkey,” said Edison Miller, 73, of California, a former Marine Corps pilot held more than five years. Miller was among seven POWs who met with Fonda in Hanoi. He said he didn’t recall her asking any questions other than about their names, if that. He said that he passed her no piece of paper, and that to his knowledge, no other POW in the group did, despite the e-mail’s claims. > Col. Larry Carrigan, the U.S. serviceman whose name is invoked in the e-mailed reproduced at the head of this article, has affirmed that he neither claimed nor experienced any of what has been attributed to him, and that he never even met Jane Fonda: < “It’s a figment of somebody’s imagination.” said Ret. Col. Larry Carrigan, one of the servicemen mentioned in the ‘slips of paper’ incident. Carrigan was shot down over North Vietnam in 1967 and did spend time in a POW camp. He has no idea why the story was attributed to him, saying, “I never met Jane Fonda.” In 2005, the Minneapolis Star Tribune reported that Carrigan “is so tired of having to repeat that he wasn’t beaten after Fonda’s visit and that there were no beating deaths at that time that he won’t talk to the media anymore.” > The tale about a defiant serviceman who spit at Jane Fonda and was severely beaten as a result is often attributed to Air Force pilot Jerry Driscoll. He has also repeatedly stated on the record that it did not originate with him: < Driscoll said he never met Fonda, as the e-mail claims — and therefore, never spit on her and didn’t suffer permanent double vision from a subsequent beating. “Totally false. It did not happen,” Driscoll said. “I don’t know who came up with [my] name. The trouble that individual has caused me!” he said, referring to the time he has spent repeatedly denying the persistent myth. > Mike McGrath, President of NAM-POWs, has also stepped forward to disclaim the Internet-circulated rumors about Jane Fonda and American POWs: < Please excuse the generic response, but I have been swamped with so many e-mails on the subject of the Jane Fonda article (Carrigan, Driscoll, strips of paper, torture and deaths of POWs, etc.) that I have to resort to this pre-scripted rebuttal. The truth is that most of this never happened. This is a hoax story placed on the internet by unknown Fonda haters. No one knows who initiated the story. Please assist by not propagating the story. Fonda did enough bad things to assure her a correct place in the garbage dumps of history. We don’t want to be party to false stories, which could be used as an excuse that her real actions didn’t really happen either. I have spoken with all the parties named: Carrigan, Driscoll, et al. They all state that this particular internet story is a hoax and they wish to disassociate their names from the false story. > Even Henry Mark Holzer and Erika Holzer, whose 2002 book “Aid and Comfort”: Jane Fonda in North Vietnam made the argument that Jane Fonda could have been tried and convicted of treason for her activities in North Vietnam, acknowledged that the “slips of paper” tale was untrue: < Let’s set the record straight. It has been reported on the Internet in recent years that POWs surreptitiously slipped Fonda messages which she turned over to the North Vietnamese. That story is false. Also untrue is that any POW died for refusing to meet with Fonda. It has been reported in the media and on the Internet that two POWs were tortured in an effort to force them into meeting with Fonda. However, despite considerable effort to find independent corroboration of these stories, we have been unable to do so. > Jane Fonda’s inclusion in the 30 April 1999 ABC television special A Celebration: 100 Years of Great Women (hosted by Barbara Walters) fanned the flames of anger within many who felt she had never properly atoned for her behavior. However, that program was produced and broadcast over seventeen years ago; contrary to outdated messages which still make the rounds of the Internet, Jane Fonda’s being honored as one of America’s “great women” isn’t something that just happened or is about to happen. (Nor, as claimed in some versions, does “Obama [now] want to honor her” — the 100 Years of Great Women program was aired over nine years before Barack Obama was elected President.) It’s also not the case, as stated in some later versions of this rumor, that Jane Fonda was slated to “portray Nancy Reagan in an upcoming film biography of the Reagans.” The referenced movie (The Butler) has already been completed, and it wasn’t a biography of Ronald and Nancy Reagan — it was a film about a character named Cecil Gains based on the life of Eugene Allen, who served as the head butler at the White House under eight different presidents between 1952 and 1986. Jane Fonda was one of a large cast of actors and actresses who played supporting roles portraying former presidents and first ladies in that movie. In 1988, sixteen years after the fact, Fonda finally met with Vietnam veterans to apologize for her actions. This nationally televised apology (during which she characterized her actions as “thoughtless and careless”) came at a time when New England vets were successfully disrupting a film project she was working on, leading some to read a huge dollop of self-interest into her apology. Fonda also apologized in 2005, an act which once again coincided with the release of a film in which she had a starring role (Monster-in-Law, her first leading role since 1990’s Stanley & Iris) and a book tour to promote her autobiography. As she had several years earlier, though, Fonda specifically apologized for the act of posing for photographs while seated at (an inoperative) North Vietnamese anti-aircraft gun, but not for her other activities in North Vietnam: < “I will go to my grave regretting that. The image of Jane Fonda, Barbarella, Henry Fonda’s daughter, just a woman sitting on a enemy aircraft gun, was a betrayal,” said Fonda. “It was like I was thumbing my nose at the military. And at the country that gave me privilege. It was the largest lapse of judgment that I can even imagine. I don’t thumb my nose at this country. I care deeply about American soldiers.” The 67-year-old actress and activist, however, defended her decision to go to Hanoi and said she had no regrets about being photographed with American POWs there or making broadcasts on Radio Hanoi because she was trying to stop the war. “Well, both sides were using propaganda, were using the POWs for propaganda,” said Fonda. “I don’t think there was anything wrong with it. It’s not something that I will apologize for.” Nor does she apologize for making broadcasts on Radio Hanoi. “Our government was lying to us, and men were dying because of it,” she said. “And I felt that I had to do anything that I could to expose the lies, and help end the war. That was my goal.” >

Abrams, Garry.  “Fonda Meets with Vets, Wins a Few Hearts.”   Los Angeles Times.  20 June 1988  (p. E1).;Andersen, Christopher.  Citizen Jane: The Turbulent Life of Jane Fonda.   New York: Henry Holt, 1990.  ISBN 0-8050-0959-0.;Elvin, John.  “The Vietnam War is Over, But ‘Hanoi Jane’ Lives On.”   Insight on the News.  25 November 1996  (p. 20).;Fonda, Jane.  My Life So Far.   New York: Random House, 2005.  ISBN 0-375-50710-8.;Grossberg, Josh.  “Fonda Regrets ‘Hanoi Jane.'”   E! Online.  1 April 2005.;Hahn, Trudi.  “Ex-POW Is No Fan of Fonda, But He Debunks E-Mail Claim.”   [Minneapolis] Star Tribune  25 May 2005.;Hershberger, Mary.  Jane Fonda’s War: A Political Biography of an Antiwar Icon.   New York: The New Press, 2005.  ISBN 1-56584-988-4.;Holzer, Henry Mark and Erika Holzer.  “Aid and Comfort”: Jane Fonda in North Vietnam.   Jefferson, NC: McFarland & Company, 2002.  ISBN 0-7864-1247-X.;Jacoby, Jeff.  “Dubious Honor for Hanoi Jane.”   The [Montreal] Gazette.  18 June 1999  (p. B3).;Labbe, J.R.  “Dubious Honor for Hanoi Jane.”   Omaha World-Herald.  11 May 1999  (p. 19).;London, Herbert.  “ABA Invite to Fonda an Outrage.”   The Times-Picayune.  14 August 1999  (p. B7).;Zekas, Rita.  “He’s Not Fonda Jane.”   The Toronto Star.  11 August 1990  (p. M20).;Associated Press.  “Viet Nam Vets Meet with Jane Fonda.”   The Toronto Star.  20 June 1988  (p. C4).;Associated Press.  “Jane Fonda Regrets N. Vietnam Photo.”   20 June 2000.;Reuters.  “Man Spits Tobacco Juice in Jane Fonda’s Face at Book Signing.”   Houston Chronicle.  21 April 2005.;Itkowitz, Colby.  How Jane Fonda’s 1972 Trip to North Vietnam Earned Her the Nickname ‘Hanoi Jane.’”   The Washington Post.  18 September 2017.

15-days-darkness-november

15-days-darkness-november

NASA confirmed the Earth will experience 15 straight days of darkness in November 2017.

Back in July 2015, the fake news web site Newswatch33 published an article titled “NASA Confirms Earth Will Experience 15 Days of Complete Darkness in November 2015,” reporting that: < NASA has confirmed that the Earth will experience 15 days of total darkness between November 15 and November 29, 2015. The event, according to NASA, hasn’t occurred in over 1 Million years. Astronomers from NASA have indicated that the world will remain in complete darkness starting on Sunday, November 15, 2015 at 3 a.m. and will end on Monday, November 30, 2015 at 4:15 p.m. According to officials, the “November Black Out” event will be caused by another astronomical event between Venus and Jupiter. Charles Bolden, who was appointed to head of NASA by President Obama, issued a 1000 page document explaining the event to the White House. > This bit of fake news was lifted from an older (debunked) viral rumor that had already been around the online block several times before and has long since become an “evergreen” online hoax — a jape that is typically resurrected a few times a year by dubious web sites that simply update the time span for the alleged “period of darkness” and send it winging around the Internet again. While Charles Bolden is a real NASA official, he issued no report or announcement about “15 days of darkness.” Moreover, Newswatch33 web site was not a legitimate news outlet, but a fake news site that began darkening the doorstep of social media networks shortly after the nearly identical NewsWatch28 fake news site shut down in mid-2015.

steelers-fined-1m-each

steelers-fined-1m-each

David Mikkelson

The NFL has fined Pittsburgh Steelers players $1 million each for staying in their locker room during the national anthem.

On 24 September 2017, the America’s Last Line of Defense web site published reporting that the Pittsburgh Steelers football team was fining its players $1 million each for engaging in protests that involved “taking a knee” or “hiding in the locker room” during the playing of the U.S. national anthem: < The Pittsburgh Steelers thought it would be safe to take “taking a knee” to a whole new level by hiding in the locker room while the National Anthem played and everyone else showed reverence for OUR country, but they didn’t count on it being extremely costly. It was a bad decision. NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell, who donated to Donald Trump’s election campaign, announced shortly after the game began that every player who “protested” the National Anthem and showed “immense disrespect to our nation” would be fined a cool million dollars. > It is true that the Steelers remained in their locker room (rather than being present on the sidelines) during the playing of the U.S. national anthem prior to their 24 September 2017 game with the Chicago Bears, as ABC News reported: < NFL players, teams and owners across the league responded Sunday to President Trump’s criticism of players kneeling in protest during the national anthem, with some kneeling, others locking arms and still others choosing not to participate in the national anthem ceremony at all. As the “Star-Spangled Banner” played at Soldier Field in Chicago for the noon game between the Chicago Bears and the Steelers, the Pittsburgh team’s sideline was virtually empty. Steelers coach Mike Tomlin told a CBS Sports reporter prior to the game that his team would stay in the locker room during the anthem. “We’re not participating in the anthem today,” Tomlin said, adding that the action was “not to be disrespectful to the anthem” but to remove the team “from this circumstance.” “People shouldn’t have to choose” whether to kneel or stand during the anthem, he said. “If a guy feels a need to do something he should not be separated from his teammate who chooses not to.” “So we’re not participating today,” he said. “That’s our decision.” During the anthem, several Steelers coaches were on the sidelines and one player, former Army Ranger Alejandro Villaneuva, stood near the tunnel to the team’s locker room, ESPN reported. > However, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell did not impose any fine (much less one of a cool $1 million each) on the Pittsburgh players, nor did he hand down any other form of punishment or announce any disciplinary action against them. Reports of whopping fines supposedly levied against Steelers players are a fiction that originated with America’s Last Line of Defense, a fake news site whose disclaimer notes that it “is a satirical publication” which presents “fiction as fact” and uses “sources [that] don’t actually exist.”

pizza-hut-free-pizza-anniversary-scam

pizza-hut-free-pizza-anniversary-scam

Fraud & Scams

Pizza Hut is giving three free pizzas away to Facebook users in honor of its 58th anniversary.

In October 2017, multiple versions of a dubious post titled “Pizza Hut is giving 3 FREE Large Pizza Coupon on their 58th Anniversary” circulated on Facebook. The link lead to suspicious domains including pizzahutfree.us, pizzahut.com-freezones.us, pizzahut.com-freezones.us, and massiveoffers.xyz/p/, none of which followed the proper formatting for a pizzahut.com subdomain, which is “link.pizzahut.com.” Those who clicked through found a page that looked somewhat legitimate, but showed signs of being a very common survey scam. Users were first asked a series of questions: The page followed a common scammer template of appropriating Pizza Hut’s logo and Facebook’s visual interface, but sloppily boasted that entrants had “a chance to get [a] Papa [John’s] Coupon.” Any interaction with the prompts (again mentioning Papa John’s 58th anniversary, not Pizza Hut’s) led to a screen encouraging potential victims to spread the scam further on Facebook: Underneath the “Congratulations” interface was a series of what appeared to be comments from real Facebook users who’d successfully redeemed the purported coupon. All of the profiles featured were for individuals with jobs displayed as “MD, at the Hospital”: Pizza Hut addressed a previous flood of customer queries on their Facebook wall during a similar scam in May 2016: < Don’t believe what you see. It’s easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there’s a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization’s real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that’s too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. >

Patterson, Emily.  “Customer Survey Scam Lures Victims with Gift Card.”     Better Business Bureau.  4 July 2014.

tim-allen-cancelled-political-views

tim-allen-cancelled-political-views

The Tim Allen show 'Last Man Standing' was cancelled due to the star's political beliefs.

When television network ABC announced that they were canceling comedian Tim Allen’s popular sitcom Last Man Standing, many people — including the show’s star — were shocked. After all, it was the third most-watched scripted show on the network, behind Grey’s Anatomy and Modern Family, and received solid ratings: < Stunned and blindsided by the network I called home for the last six years. #lastmanstanding — Tim Allen (@ofctimallen) May 16, 2017 > Some commentators accused ABC of canceling the show due to its conservative bent: Allen played an outspoken conservative on who often riffed on political issues such as Obamacare on the sitcom. Tim Allen’s personal politics somewhat mirrored the character’s, as the former Home Improvement star is a Republican who attended Donald Trump’s inauguration. A petition that garnered more than 300,000 signatures on Change.org claimed the show was canceled because it was the only entertainment program that was not constantly shoving “liberal ideals down the throats of the viewers”: < Despite consistently high rankings, especially considering the time slot in which it is aired, Tim Allen’s show “Last Man Standing” has been cancelled by the network on which it is aired, ABC. Last Man Standing stands out in the sea of network television sitcoms. It is a show that appeals to a broad swath of Americans who find very few shows that extol the virtues with which they can identify; namely conservative values. Last Man Standing was not just selling conservative ideals though, as some of the characters in the show are clearly of the liberal persuasion, yet the characters on the show all manage to get along and take care of one another, despite their politically opposed views. The show is about more than politics though, it is about family. In fact, politics is only a secondary part of the show, but one in which many Americans can readily identify. Last Man Standing is one of the only shows on broadcast television, and the only sitcom, that is not constantly shoving liberal ideals down the throats of the viewers. And sadly, that is likely the real reason the show has been cancelled. > Inevitably, this accusation was boiled down into a meme eventually shared by former Alaska governor Sarah Palin (a Republican): Allen described his experience at Trump’s inauguration during an appearance on the late-night talk show Jimmy Kimmel Live, saying that he was “almost afraid” to say he had been at the event. However, his support for Trump was already well known, making it unlikely that the show’s cancellation was directly related to his attendance at the inauguration. Although it’s true that Last Man Standing drew solid ratings, Vox took a closer look at the circumstances surrounding the show’s cancellation and found that a variety of reasons why the series might have gotten the axe. For one, Last Man Standing just finished its 6th season, and the show’s cast and staff were likely in line for a pay bump which would have made the show much more expensive to produce: < After season five, if a show isn’t a blockbuster (like The Big Bang Theory or The Walking Dead), every additional season becomes harder and harder to procure, even if the ratings are pretty good on the whole. The reason is simple — actors, writers, technicians, and other people who’ve stayed with the show for its full run begin to earn pay bumps, usually seeing solid raises in seasons six and seven especially. (You’ll often hear about studios agreeing to new “two- or three-year deals” with certain cast members post-season five, and that’s often to lock those cast members in at a rate the studio can live with for future seasons.) This makes a lot of sense. Traditionally, seasons four and five are when a studio starts to make back the money it’s invested into a series, from syndication and other means. And Last Man Standing has both lucrative syndication and cable rerun deals with various networks, which have paid off in solid ratings that fed back into the main program (which actually saw viewership increases in season six — almost unheard of). But it also probably caught the show in a weird Catch-22. Last Man Standing was successful — but not successful enough. It was doing well enough to justify better pay for the cast, especially, but it wasn’t doing well enough for the studio to demand more money from the network (more on this below). > In addition to renegotiating contracts with the cast of Last Man Standing, ABC may have also had to look at its licensing deal for the show. ABC doesn’t actually own Last Man Standing; rather, they license the show from 20th Century Fox: < There’s one big reason this might be the case: Since ABC doesn’t own the show, it doesn’t get any of the show’s ancillary revenues — from streaming services and syndication and cable reruns and international broadcasts. Those all go to the studio, Fox. ABC pretty much just collects ad revenue at this point. Thus, ABC has no incentive to keep making more episodes of the show from a financial perspective, where Fox has huge incentive to do so. It’s easy to see how that situation could have grown unsustainable. > ABC also recently announced that the tremendously popular American Idol program would be returning to their network lineup, which may have forced them to move or cancel other shows to make room for it. ABC Entertainment president Channing Dungey said on a press call with reporters that she canceled Last Man Standing for the same “business and scheduling reasons” that led to the cancellation of other shows: < On a call, ABC Entertainment president Channing Dungey called the decision to not renew Last Man Standing the type of “tough calls” she needs to make in her job. Asked whether the show’s content and the fact that Allen is a prominent Republican played a role in the decision, she said, “I canceled Last Man Standing for the same business and scheduling reasons I canceled The Real O’Neals, Dr. Ken, The Catch, American Crime.” “It was a challenging (call) because it was steady performer but when we made the decision not to continue with comedies on Friday that’s where it landed,” she added. ABC’s Friday comedy block will be gone next fall, replaced by Once Upon a Time and Marvel’s Inhumans/Agents Of S.H.I.E.L.D. for a fantasy/sci-fi block. Did the fact that Last Man Standing is not owned by ABC — it comes from 20th TV — play a role in its demise? “The truth of the matter is that there are many factors that go into the decision-making process: ratings, critical acclaim. Of course we look at ownership structure, I don’t think we are alone,” Dungey said, quickly noting that the network has shows from multiple independent studios, including Warner Bros. TV and Sony TV. “I wouldn’t say that was the deciding factor.” > It’s unlikely that Tim Allen’s politics were the sole or primary reason behind the cancellation of Last Man Standing. However, when asked whether politics played a role in deciding the network’s lineup, Dungey said: < There’s a lot of news, and I think that people are definitely looking to television as a place they want to feel, they want to laugh, they want to cry … the mood of the country has told us that television is a little bit of an escape … What people want to do now is connect and experience and to feel … that did frame a lot of our development thinking this season. > Despite these claims, the network will soon have another Trump supporter on the air. The network is reviving Roseanne, which will star Roseanne Barr, who once said she became a Republican because of Donald Trump: < Y I became a Republican: Because Trump was th ONLY candidate who talked about the working classes, not just the middle classes. When was 1/2 — Roseanne Barr (@therealroseanne) November 18, 2016 >

VanDerWerff, Todd.  “5 Reasons ABC Might Have Canceled the Tim Allen Comedy Last Man Standing.”   Vox.  16 May 2017.;Andreeva, Nellie.  “‘Last Man Standing’: ABC Chief on Canceling Tim Allen Comedy, Politics & Ownership As Possible Factors.”   Deadline.  16 May 2017.;Stanhope, Kate.  “‘Roseanne’ Revival Officially a Go at ABC.”   The Hollywood Reporter.  16 May 2017.;Shea, Christopher.  “Katy Perry to Judge ABC’s Revival of ‘American Idol.’”   The New York Times.  17 May 2017.;Yahr, Emily.  “No, ABC Says, ‘Last Man Standing’ Was Not cCanceled Because of Tim Allen’s Politics.”   The Washington Post.  16 May 2017.

stephen-colbert-fired

stephen-colbert-fired

Stephen Colbert was fired by CBS after President Trump called and ordered his termination.

On 5 May 2017 the web site The Last Line of Defense published an article claiming late-night television host Stephen Colbert had been fired from his CBS show after President Trump called to complain about its content. < President Trump made a single phone call this morning to the CEO of CBS and voila … Stephen Colbert was fired as host of the Late Show. According to Jeff Derpinger of the White House Office of Information and Propaganda, President Trump talked to J.L. Meshner for about five minutes and told him he can either find a new host for the Late Show or kiss his network’s White House press credentials goodbye. … Colbert’s lawyer says the comedian will be filing suit against CBS and President Trump. He claims that not only is CBS in breach of contract but that Trump violated federal law when he used the Office of the President to carry out an act of “revenge.” What he doesn’t [seem] to get is that Trump is the chief executive and can pretty much do whatever he wants if it’s in the best interest of the country, which this is. > In his 1 May 2017, Colbert insulted Trump repeatedly and made a joke about him performing fellatio on Russian President Vladimir Putin. The Last Line of Defense claim appeared as news broke that the Federal Communications Commission (FCC) is investigating Colbert over the monologue. But the claim, like all other information published on that site, is fabricated. A disclaimer clarifies that all of its articles are fake news: < The Resistance may include information from sources that may or may not be reliable and facts that don’t necessarily exist. All articles should be considered satirical and any and all quotes attributed to actual people complete and total baloney. Pictures that represent actual people should be considered altered and not in any way real. >

buffalo-wild-wings-anthem

buffalo-wild-wings-anthem

On 11 September 2017, a worker at a Buffalo Wild Wings in Eastvale, California, turned down the volume on the national anthem before an NFL game, saying it was "divisive."

An employee at a California location of the Buffalo Wild Wings restaurant chain muted the national anthem before a football game on 11 September 2017, the 16th anniversary of the September 11th attacks, saying the anthem was divisive and citing company policy, according to several news reports. KCAL, the Los Angeles CBS affiliate, reported: < Customers at a Buffalo Wild Wings in Eastvale say an employee refused to let them hear the anthem before an NFL game Monday night – which happened to be the 16th anniversary of the terrorist attacks on Sept. 11, 2001. A customer who identified herself as Lori said the employee refused to play the sound of the anthem for one game, but played it for the game before. When he was asked why, the employee — who was not identified — said the anthem is too controversial, and it was company policy not to play it. > Later, the company appeared to confirm that there had been an incident involving the national anthem at the Eastvale location and issued an apology: < We apologize that Guests at the Eastvale, California location didn’t receive the positive sports viewing experience we strive to provide in all of our restaurants every day. This was the action of one individual and does not reflect our corporate practice. Our intent is to show game broadcasts in their entirety including the National Anthem, post-game interviews, and highlights. > According to San Francisco Bay Area news channel KRON 4, World Wide Wings — a Washington state-based company that operates the restaurant location in question — also confirmed the incident in an apology sent to the channel: < World Wide Wings, a Buffalo Wild Wings franchise, apologizes for what happened at a restaurant before the Monday Night Football game. We do not have a policy regarding this matter. > Joe Janaszek, Chief Marketing Officer for World Wide Wings, told us that the employee concerned no longer works for World Wide Wings, and emphasized that it was not company policy to turn down the volume during the National Anthem. < This gentleman [the employee at Eastvale], who no longer works for us, made the decision to turn the volume down during the national anthem…He claimed it was company policy, because it was too controversial. We don’t know why he did that, and we wish he hadn’t done it. > Janaszek pointed out that World Wide Wings CEO Tom Cook is a military veteran, and “could not be more disappointed about this incident.” The controversy surrounding this episode comes in the midst of an ongoing public debate about the decision by some NFL players — in particular African-American players — to kneel during the National Anthem as a protest against police killings of unarmed African Americans.Â

everything-donald-trump-accomplished

everything-donald-trump-accomplished

An online graphic accurately details President Trump's notable accomplishments during his first four months in office.

In May 2017, a Reddit user posted a graphic that purported to list all of President Trump’s accomplishments during his first four months in office. It was then widely shared on social media: < TRUMP ACCOMPLISHMENTS .. Retweet the hell out of this to annoy @ABC @CBS @cnn @cnbc @MSNBC @nbc @nytimes @washingtonpost #dishonestmedia. pic.twitter.com/ITArBQgcmJ — Small Biz for Trump (@SmallBiz4Trump) May 15, 2017 > Creating homebrew visual aids touting the accomplishments (or failures) of top politicians is a popular online pastime, not least because it’s a cheap and easy way to propagandize, and because there are no pesky standards of fairness and accuracy to meet. As we’ve noted with regard to previous specimens (for example, a late-2016 meme touting the alleged economic achievements of President Obama), the graphic format lends itself to the display of cherry-picked facts to make a simplistic case with no semblance of context or nuance. In this case, the claim is that, despite all the carping in the mainstream press about “chaos” and “ineptitude” in the Oval Office, President Trump has actually accomplished quite a lot during his first four months as chief executive, and thus you will not find mention of major campaign promises Trump has had difficulty keeping so far, such as instituting a Muslim immigration ban and building a wall on the Mexican border. Also, since it’s very much a partisan case being made, there will be disagreement over what constitutes an “accomplishment.” Some feats, such as reducing unemployment, are uncontroversial, while others, such as dismantling entire government agencies, aren’t likely to be regarded as accomplishments by those who find the functions of those agencies critical. Here are the claims: 4.4 percent – lowest since May 2007 As reported in the Washington Post, government data released on 5 May 2017 indicated that the national unemployment rate hit a new low in April: < The U.S. job market rebounded strongly last month and the unemployment rate fell to the lowest level seen in a decade, government data released Friday morning showed, calming fears that had bubbled up in the past month about the state of the economy. Employers added 211,000 jobs in April as the unemployment rate ticked down to 4.4 percent, the lowest level since May 2007. > It bears pointing out that the jobless rate had already been on a steady decline since 2010. Further, unemployment hit a previous nine-year low of 4.6 percent in December 2016 when President Obama was still in office. It climbed back up to 4.8 percent in January, dipped to 4.7 percent in February, and to 4.5 percent in March 2017. To what degree short-term improvements in the economy since January can be attributed to a new chief executive whose economic policies remain nascent is perennially up for debate, though according to The New York Times‘ senior economic correspondent Neil Irwin, a “Trump effect” that is buoying corporate hiring policies after the election cannot be ruled out: < So does Mr. Trump deserve any credit for solid economic results? If you think the economy is driven by concrete, specific policies around taxes, spending, monetary policy and regulation, the answer is no. If you think that what really matters is the mood in the executive suite, then just maybe. > SoftBank $50B Exxon $20B Hyundai $3.1B Apple $1B Chrysler $1B GM $1B Bayer AG $1B Toyota $600M LG $250M This is a mostly-accurate, partial list of corporations who have announced investments in American facilities and/or jobs since the election of Donald Trump. With the exception of Bayer AG (which announced $8 billion in new investments, not $1 billion as claimed), the dollar amounts match those cited in press reports between January and April 2017 (sources: Softbank, Exxon Mobil Corp., Hyundai-Kia, Apple, Fiat Chrysler, General Motors, Bayer AG, Toyota, LG Electronics). It’s not necessarily accurate to characterize all of these commitments as “accomplishments” of President Trump, however. As CBS Moneywatch’s Irina Ivanova reported in January 2017: < Few of the jobs companies are promising to create in the U.S. can be attributed to a sudden renewed commitment to USA Inc. inspired by Trump’s “America First” policies. Indeed, the businesses Trump has been quick to praise have been careful not to characterize their recent hiring announcements as new. And as usual with corporate investments of this scale, such plans are typically months — or even years — in the making, suggesting they long predate the presidential election. > For example, Fiat Chrysler said their promise of a $1 billion investment in Michigan and Ohio plants, projected to create 2,000 jobs, was the “second phase” of an industrialization plan announced in 2016. GM’s $1 billion investment was “several years in the making,” according to sources cited by CBS. The largest of all the announced commitments, SoftBank’s pledge of $50 billion, was also in the works long before Trump won the election: < Another widely publicized corporate initiative that Trump trumpeted — a promise by SoftBank to create 50,000 high-tech jobs in the U.S. — was the result of a tech fund the company announced on Oct. 14 — three weeks before the election. Given the massive tech industry in the U.S., economists say much of the planned $50 billion investment would have found its way to the states regardless of who occupied the White House. “You don’t just decide overnight to invest $3 billion,” said Nathan Jensen, a professor at the University of Texas who studies interactions between government and corporations. > Bayer AG’s commitment to an $8 billion investment and the creation of 3,000 U.S. jobs was announced by the Trump transition team after the president-elect met in January 2017 with the CEOs of Bayer AG and Monsanto, who are planning a merger. Transition spokesman Sean Spicer credited Trump’s negotiating skills for the pledge, but some analysts were skeptical that the companies had actually promised anything that wasn’t already on the table when plans for the merger were first revealed in September 2016: < Bayer and Monsanto said in a joint statement after Spicer’s remarks that the “combined company expects to spend approximately $16 billion in R&D in agriculture over the next six years with at least half of this investment made in the United States.” That amounts to about $2.7 billion a year, which roughly equates to what the combined companies already spend in that area globally, [Wall Street analyst Jeremy] Redenius said. As for the U.S. breakdown, he estimates it’s likely close to half already; Monsanto spends $1.5 billion a year, the majority of which is in the U.S., he said, and Bayer already invests in R&D here as well. “Not an increase, but not substantially cutting,” he said of the global figure. > The merger, which awaits U.S. regulatory approval, is not likely to be completed until 2018, CNBC reported. $182B in April 2017 It is true that the U.S. Treasury reported a $182 billion budget surplus in April 2017, the largest April surplus since 2001 (and the second-largest in history), according to MarketWatch. It’s unclear exactly how that surplus is attributable to President Trump, however. April is typically a surplus month because of tax receipts. In addition, citing a Congressional Budget Office (CBO) review as its source, Associated Press reported that the April 2017 surplus was “inflated” because of a tax deadline change allowing corporations to pay federal taxes in April that in previous years were paid in March. It remains to be seen what effect Tump’s policies will have on the budget deficit for 2017 as a whole (the fiscal year ends on 30 September). The CBO projects a 4.6 percent drop in the deficit from what it was in 2016, but that is based on laws and policies already in effect when Trump took office. DOW at 20,896 The stock market can be fickle. As of April 29, the Dow Jones Industrial Average was at 20,940.51, 6.12 percent higher than when Trump took office — positive movement, unquestionably. That number had risen to 20,981.94 by 16 May, then plummeted 372 points the next day as the market was shaken by news that Trump had shared classified information with Russian diplomats in the White House and attempted to divert FBI Director James Comey from an investigation of Trump’s alleged ties to Russia before he fired him. Currently at 125.6 It’s true that the Consumer Confidence Index, a metric assessing how ordinary consumers feel about the strength of the economy, hit 125.6 in March 2017, its highest point since 2000. It is also true that it fell five points to 120.3 the following month. Even so, it showed that consumers (as of April) had more confidence in the economy under Trump than under Obama, during whose administration the index never exceeded 113.7 (although it did manage to rise to that point after bottoming out in 2009 at 25). Passed 32 bills through Congress As of 17 May 2017, President Trump had signed 34 bills passed by Congress, a comparatively high number in such a short period of time (since Franklin Delano Roosevelt, who signed 76 pieces of legislation in his first 100 days, only Harry Truman, at 55, signed more). That’s not to say that all of the legislation signed by Trump between January and May 2017 was necessarily noteworthy, however. One bill changed the name of a Veterans Affairs outpatient clinic in Pago Pago, American Samoa; another renamed a VA health center in Pennsylvania; another approves the location of a memorial honoring Desert Storm and Desert Shield veterans; three appointed citizen regents to the board of the Smithsonian Institution. Nor should it be assumed that Trump’s signing of a given bill meant he or his administration was actively involved in its passage. Thirteen such bills nullifying federal regulations enacted during the Obama administration (such as H.J. Res. 69, reversing a U.S. Fish and Wildlife rule pertaining to Alaska’s National Wildlife Refuges and S.J. Res. 34, reversing FCC Internet privacy rules) were rushed through Congress and quickly signed because they made use of the Congressional Review Act of 1996, which imposes a 60-day limit on the time allowed to overrule previously passed laws. Appointed constitutionalist Supreme Court Justice Neil Gorsuch This is true. Gorsuch was confirmed by the U.S. Senate on 7 April 2017. After 8 years of inaction This is true. Trump fulfilled a campaign promise by signing an executive order withdrawing the U.S. from the Trans-Pacific Partnership international trade agreement on 23 January 2017, one day after announcing he would renegotiate it. Despite President Obama’s fervent support for the deal, many groups, including labor unions, were critical of the TPP, and CNN reported that its chances of approval by Congress were already “bleak.” 40 percent fewer illegal border crossings and deportation of violent and repeat offenders The number of illegal border crossings from Mexico into the U.S. in February 2017 were indeed down 40 percent from the previous month, according to statistics provided by the Department of Homeland Security, and that downward trend, which had actually started the previous November, continued in March and April 2017. This U.S. Customs and Border Protection chart shows how striking the change was compared to the previous five years: This may or may not prove to be a lasting trend, CNN reported in March, but some such “Trump effect” is the most plausible explanation for what has occurred so far in 2017: Water contamination crisis started in April 2014 It’s true that in March 2017, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) awarded a $100 million grant to the state of Michigan to upgrade the drinking water infrastructure in Flint, which experienced a lead pollution crisis potentially affecting as many as 100,000 people beginning in 2014. There has been some dispute, however, over whether this ought to be labeled a “Trump accomplishment” or an “Obama accomplishment.” As we noted in a previous article, funding for the grant came from a bill signed by President Obama in 2016, though the monies weren’t officially awarded until after he left office, hence some prefer to credit it to Trump. Strengthening relationships   China   Japan   Russia   UK Tough on North Korea Tough on Syria Freed Humanitarian Workers from Egypt Although President Trump pledged to “strengthen” overseas relationships going into office and he had already met with several important foreign leaders by mid-May 2017, it is too soon to tell to what degree his promise will bear fruit. China: The president-elect got off to a rocky start with China in December by accepting a congratulatory call from the leader of Taiwan, which China views as a province,not an independent nation, and with which the U.S. does not have diplomatic relations. China lodged a formal complaint. In April, Trump met with Chinese President Xi Jinping, with whom he said he made “tremendous progress” but no breakthroughs. A trade deal negotiated by the Trump administration with China in May was rated “pretty good” by the Wall Street Journal. Japan: Japanese Prime Minister Abe, who has met twice with Trump, issued a joint statement with him reaffirming the “unshakable alliance” between the U.S. and Japan. That is despite Trump having called Japan a “currency manipulator” during the presidential campaign and pulling out of the TPP, which Abe supported. Whether the “very, very good chemistry” Trump says he has with Abe will improve the relationship between the two countries over the long haul remains to be seen. Russia: U.S.-Russia relations have been strained for many years, a situation not improved by Russia’s attempts to meddle in the U.S. presidential election, nor by the fact that Trump associates are under investigation for possible collusion in that effort. A U.S. missile strike by Trump against Syria, with whose government Russia is closely allied, were strongly condemned by Russian leaders, who warned there could be “extremely serious” consequences. U.K.: British Prime Minister Theresa May was the first foreign leader to visit the Trump White House, and their cordial meeting was portrayed by both countries as a renewal of the “special relationship” between the U.S and the U.K. According to the BBC, Obama was seen by many Britons as more interested in the European Union as a whole than in the U.K. itself, while Trump, who was in favor of Brexit, is perceived as the opposite. Tough on Korea? President Trump has employed what the Washington Post calls “hard-line rhetoric” against North Korea, including threats of force, in hopes of squelching that county’s increasing militarism, a strategy some experts dismiss as “macho posturing” that could escalate into a Cuban Missile Crisis-like confrontation. Tough on Syria? In April 2017, Trump ordered U.S. missile strikes against an air base in Syria in response to an alleged chemical weapons attack on civilians by the Syrian government, which has been known to brutalize its own people during the ongoing civil war there. Trump’s gesture came up short, however, in that the Syrian Air Force was able to launch a new attack against rebel forces from that same base just hours later. Humanitarian workers in Egypt: In April 2017 President Trump negotiated the release of U.S.. citizen Aya Hijazi, her Egyptian husband, and four other humanitarian workers from a prison in Cairo, Egypt, where they had been locked up since 2014, without evidence or trial, on charges of child abuse and trafficking. Trimming the fat at many overblown government agencies and promoting small business growth by reigning in the EPA Although it is true that President Trump signed an executive order on 13 March 2017 directing the heads of executive branch departments to eliminate all “unnecessary” agencies and reorganize those that remain to improve their “efficiency, effectiveness, and accountability,” the order gave said department heads six months from the date of signing to come up with suggestions for this process, so not much fat has been trimmed thus far despite the groundwork being laid. Regarding efforts to “reign in” the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), a CNN report confirms that’s been among Trump’s top priorities from the start: < President Donald Trump made a campaign trail promise to eliminate the Environmental Protection Agency — a department once looked to as an important national force tackling climate change — and during his first 100 days in office has held true to his word, taking swift strides towards dismantling the agency and rolling back regulations. Alongside EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, a former Oklahoma attorney general who once worked tangentially with the fossil fuel industry to oppose Obama-era regulations, the Trump administration has so far issued a flurry of EPA-focused executive orders, proposed employee buyouts, handed down a social media gag order and is proposing significant cuts to the EPA budget. > The National Federation of Independent Business (NFIB), a small business advocacy group, has hailed Trump’s commitment to cutting “burdensome regulations,” while environmental protection groups see it as a threat to public health and the future of the planet. Finished Dakota Access Pipeline & reversed Obama’s “Land Grab” EO, freeing US to use our own natural resources The controversial Dakota Access Pipeline project, halted under President Obama, was revived by President Trump and will begin commercial operations on 1 June 2017. Trump also issued an executive order directing a review of lands designated as national monuments: < Specifically, the review will consider all national monument designations of federal public lands since 1996 that are 100,000 acres or larger. Mr Trump singled out former President Barack Obama’s “egregious” use of federal power in using the Antiquities Act to “unilaterally” place swaths of American land and water under federal control, adding, “it’s time we ended this abusive practice.” > As with many of the other items discussed above, whether or not one regards this as an “accomplishment” (as opposed, say, to a travesty) will depend almost entirely on one’s political views going in.

Baker, Peter and Davenport, Coral.  “Trump Revives Keystone Pipeline Rejected by Obama.”   The New York Times.  24 January 2017.;Bradner, Eric.  “Trump’s TPP Withdrawal: 5 Things to Know.”   CNN.  23 January 2017.;Bunge, Jacob and Alessi, Christopher.  “Bayer, After Trump Meeting, Pledges to Add Thousands of U.S. Jobs.”   The Wall Street Journal.  18 January 2017.;Carroll, Lauren.  “Trump Has Signed More Bills in 100 Days than Any President Since Truman, Spicer Says.”   Politifact.com.  27 April 2017.;Crutsinger, Martin.  “Federal Government Records $182.4 Billion Budget Surplus.”   Associated Press.  10 May 2017.;DeCambre, Mark.  “How Trump’s Stock Market Ranks During His First 100 Days in Office.”   MarketWatch.  30 April 2017.;Green, Miranda.  “Trump’s EPA: Cuts, Infighting and No Talk of Climate Change.”   CNN.  4 May 2017.;Greene, Leonard.  “Stock Market Suffers Biggest Blow Since President Trump Took Office.”   New York Daily News.  17 May 2017.;Ivanova, Irina.  “Trump Isn’t the Reason Corporate America Is Investing in the U.S.”   CBS News.  18 January 2017.;Kopan, Tal.  “Does Border Drop Mean Trump’s Tough Talk Is Working?”   CNN.  9 March 2017.;Kulish, Nicholas and Santos, Fernanda.  “Illegal Border Crossings Appear to Drop Under Trump.   The New York Times.  8 March 2017.;Liptak, Adam and Flegenheimer, Matt.  “Neil Gorsuch Confirmed by Senate as Supreme Court Justice.”   The New York Times.  7 April 2017.;McKelvey, Tara.  “Special Relationship Gets a New Lease on Life.”   BBC.  27 January 2017.;Robb, Greg.  “U.S. April Budget Surplus Rises to $182 Billion.”   MarketWatch.  10 May 2017.;Rucker, Philip and DeYoung, Karen.  “Freed Egyptian American Prisoner Returns Home Following Trump Intervention.”   The Washington Post.  20 April 2017.;Ryan, Missy, Denyer, Simon and Rauhala, Emily.  “On North Korea, Trump Administration Talks Tough but Hopes to Avoid War.”   The Washington Post.  19 April 2017.;Ryan, Tim.  “Trump Directs Department Heads to Trim Agency Fat.”   Courthouse News.  14 March 2017.;Savransky, Rebecca.  “Tillerson: U.S.-Russia Relationship ‘At an All-Time Low Point’ Since End of Cold War.”   The Hill.  14 May 2017.;Thomas, Lauren.  “Consumer Confidence Lags in April as Americans Are Less Optimistic About Economy.”   CNBC.  25 April 2017.;Watson, Kathryn.  “Trump Executive Order Calls for Review of ‘Egregious’ Federal Land Grab.”   CBS News.  26 April 2017.;Boston Herald.  “Editorial: Getting Tough in Syria.”   20 May 2017.;CBO.gov.  “Monthly Budget Review for April 2017.”   5 May 2017.;Democracy Now.  “Trump’s Proposed EPA Cuts Threaten Health & Lives of Tens of Millions of Americans.”   3 March 2017.;NFIB.com.  “In Targeting the Waters of the United States Rule, President Trump Looks to Dismantle Another Burdensome Regulation.”   3 March 2017.;PRNewsWire.com.  “The Conference Board Consumer Confidence Index Declined in April.”   25 April 2017.;TradingEconomics.com.  “United States Unemployment Rate.”   5 May 2017.;U.S. Customs and Border Protection.  “Southwest Border Migration.”   1 May 2017.;Wall Street Journal.  “Japan’s Abe Talks Trump.”   22 May 2017.;Wall Street Journal.  “Trump’s Pretty Good China Deal.”   14 May 2017.

reeses-peanut-butter-cups

reeses-peanut-butter-cups

In September 2017, the makers of Reese's Peanut Butter Cups announced they were discontinuing the candy and withdrawing it from circulation.

On 14 September 2017, the prank web site BreakingNews365.net generated a false report that the makers of Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups were to end production of the iconic candy and withdraw them from circulation by October 2017. We received several enquiries about this from readers: < The announcement was released late on Friday Sept 8th in a press conference, that the famous candy, the original Reese’s peanut butter cups would no longer be available! “By October 2017 they will all be removed from the shelves!” Manufacturer said due to the new versions and a severe decline in sales. It is no longer justifiable to continue producing the product. Originally there were plans to keep them through Halloween, however those plans have fallen through. We say goodbye to a candy icon. RIP Reese’s peanut butter cups. Make sure to get you one before they are gone! > BreakingNews365.net and the related website BreakingNews247.net are prank generators that allow users to create fake headlines and articles, and even fabricate the number of times their prank article has been shared on Facebook. No story on these web sites (or Facebook posts that link to them) should be taken for real news. The Hershey Company, which manufactures the product, has made no such announcement. Like everything else on BreakingNews365.com, this story is fabricated. Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups rank as the largest-selling candy in the United States. Between 20 and 26 August 2017, for example, U.S. consumers bought more than $47 million worth of the product, around $8 million more than the closest competitor, M&M Peanut. Setting aside the fact that the manufacturer of Reese’s Peanut Butter Cups has not announced the demise of the product, the article bears some of the hallmarks of fake news: the manufacturer is not named; no location is given for the press conference; no representative of the company is named; a quote purportedly taken from a press conference is not attributed to anyone; and the article is poorly written, featuring inappropriate exclamation marks, missing words, and grammatical mistakes. Â

nfl-tax-non-profit-organization

nfl-tax-non-profit-organization

David Mikkelson

The National Football League enjoys tax-exempt status as a nonprofit organization.

MOSTLY FALSE

In September 2014, amid controversy over the National Football League’s (NFL) handling of domestic abuse cases involving some of its players, Senator Cory Booker of New Jersey introduced a bill that sought to accomplish what other members of Congress had previously attempted to do: disallow professional sports leagues, including the NFL, from claiming status as tax-exempt nonprofit organizations. This news prompted many of our readers to inquire, “Huh, is the NFL really tax-exempt? How is that?”: < The National Football League, like other sports leagues, is a major money-maker. Every year, the NFL pulls in somewhere close to $10 BILLION. The League’s goal is to make $25 BILLION a year by 2027. Here’s the thing: The NFL doesn’t pay Federal taxes. That’s because it is technically classified as a non-profit corporation. > It was true that the NFL, a sports league that generates an estimated $9.5 billion in revenue each year, enjoyed the status of being a tax-exempt nonprofit organization, a status that had also applied to the National Hockey League, the PGA Tour, and Major League Baseball (until 2007). But the key to understanding that exemption is realizing that it did not apply to the dozens of individual teams who are football’s primary money-makers, but only to a small part of the NFL, the NFL League Office: < Every dollar of income that is earned in the National Football League — from game tickets, television rights fees, jersey sales and national sponsorships — is subject to tax. None of this income is shielded in a tax-exempt entity. Instead, the NFL’s 32 clubs pay tax on all of these revenues. Claims that the NFL is using a tax exemption to avoid paying the tax due on these revenues are simply misinformed. The confusion arises from the fact that there is one small part of the NFL, unrelated to all this business activity, that is tax-exempt: the NFL League Office. The league office is the administrative and organizational arm of the NFL and does things like write the rules of the game, hire referees, run the college draft, negotiate the collective bargaining agreement with the players, conduct player safety research, and run youth football programs. The league office acts as a trade association for the NFL clubs. In the same way that other trade associations support companies in other lines of business, it establishes rules and standard practices for its members, develops programs to help them run their operations more efficiently and profitably, and promotes the business in the broader community. Trade associations are nonprofit organizations. They don;t engage in any business activity. As a result, they are exempt from being taxed under section 501(c)(6) of the federal tax code. (Charities are exempt under section 501(c)(3); the NFL League Office has never claimed to be a charity.) Because the league office does not receive income from game tickets, television contracts and the like, its tax exemption does not apply to any of the profits earned in the NFL overall. All the money-making activity is conducted by the for-profit, taxable teams. > The NFL was first bestowed with its tax-exempt status in 1942, when the league was struggling financially amidst the entry of the U.S. into World War II and (successfully) filed an application for tax-exempt, non-profit status with the IRS. Exactly what the NFL claimed its “nonprofit mission” was back then remains something of a mystery, as the NFL maintained it lost the copy of the application it filed with the IRS in 1942, and the IRS likewise said it was unable to find a copy of the NFL’s original application. Some critics have maintained that the NFL (and the NFL alone, not other sports leagues) was tax-exempt due to a special “loophole” inserted into the tax code in 1966, referencing Section 501(c)(6) of the IRS code, a section that specifically includes “Professional football leagues” along with “business leagues, chambers of commerce, real-estate boards, or boards of trade” as tax-exempt organizations. However, the NFL had been afforded tax-exempt status well before that modification was enacted — the code change was undertaken solely to allow the merger of the NFL and AFL (American Football League) to go forward without fear of an antitrust challenge under either the Clayton Antitrust Act or the Federal Trade Commissions Act: < Some have suggested that the league office’s tax-exempt status is the result of a “loophole” in the tax code. This is incorrect. While section 501(c)(6) does mention professional football leagues as exempt organizations, the NFL League Office and other professional sports leagues were exempt from taxes long before this provision was enacted. This provision was inserted in the tax code when the NFL and the AFL merged, simply to ensure that professional football players could continue to receive their pensions from the newly merged league without jeopardizing its existing tax status. > Still, some critics maintained that the NFL should never have been granted tax-exempt status in the first place, much less have been allowed to maintain it for so long, as the league was neither an “open” industry nor one that worked towards the greater good of its industry or the public at large: < Letting the NFL operate tax-free makes a mockery of the entire concept behind nonprofits, which is that we should give a special break to organizations that do the useful, unprofitable work normal corporations won’t. The problem is that the NFL should never have been considered a trade association in the first place. Love or hate the lobbying they do in Washington, trade groups are supposed to work for the benefit of entire industries, and be open to any business in that industry that would like to join. If you own a butter-making factory, then by God, you can pay dues and become a member of the American Butter Institute. The NFL, in contrast, operates a legally sanctioned sports cartel. It’s not in the league’s interest to let in more teams, because that could hurt the value of existing franchises. If NFL executives were out lobbying on behalf of college football teams or arena football, we might have a different story. But they’re not. The league office is the enforcement wing and rule-making body of a profit-making operation. The same goes for leagues like the NHL, which exist for the express purpose of excluding competition. The deeper issue at play here is that nonprofits exist to do things for the public good — things that for-profit companies generally don’t do. That’s why we give nonprofits a break from the IRS. And it’s why the government should be stingy about which kinds of organizations count and which don’t. We know that sports leagues won’t suddenly disappear if we treat them like normal corporations and ask them to pay, at most, a few million dollars to the government. Major League Baseball certainly hasn’t gone anywhere. The NFL won’t either. > In April 2015, the NFL announced the league office would be giving up its status as a tax-exempt organization during the 2015 fiscal year: < The National Football League announced it will end its decades-old tax-exempt status, which it said had become a “distraction.” In a letter to team owners, NFL Commissioner Roger Goodell said the move addresses a misunderstanding about the tax status of the $10 billion-a-year organization. The central league office, which coordinates and manages the league’s affairs, is listed as a nonprofit organization, but the NFL’s 32 teams already pay taxes on their profits, as well as on player salaries and merchandise sales. “The effects of the tax-exempt status of the league office have been mischaracterized repeatedly in recent years,” Mr. Goodell said in the letter. “The fact is that the business of the NFL has never been tax-exempt.” Mr. Goodell said that the league office and its management council will file returns as taxable entities for the 2015 fiscal year, adding that the change won’t affect “in any way” the function or operation of the league. However, by forgoing its tax-exempt status, the NFL will no longer be required to disclose the salaries of its commissioner and other top executives. Mr. Goodell received $35 million in salary and bonuses in 2013. >

Clegg, Jonathan.  “NFL to End Tax-Exempt Status.”   The Wall Street Journal.  28 April 2015.;Peter, Josh.  “Critics Question League’s Tax-Exempt Activities.”   New Orleans Times-Picayune.  14 July 2002.;Spector, Jeremy.  “Don’t Strip Away the NFL’s Tax Exempt Status.”   U.S. News & World Report.  30 November 2013.;Tracy, Marc.  “Bill Targets Pro Sports Leagues’ Tax-Exempt Status.”   The New York Times.  16 September 2014.;Weissman, Jordan.  “The NFL Is Not a Nonprofit.”   Slate.  18 September 2014.

doomsday-seed-vault-flooded

doomsday-seed-vault-flooded

The Svalbard Global Seed Vault, built to maintain Earth’s botanical genetic diversity in the face of future calamities, flooded due to melting permafrost.

Built deep into the interior of a remote arctic island in Norway’s Svalbard archipelago quietly lies what the press has dubbed the “Doomsday Vault”. First opened in February 2007 and run by the Norwegian Government, the Nordic Genetic Resource Centre, and the nonprofit Crop Trust, its goal is to maintain a stockpile of seeds as a bulwark against extinctions and potential future agricultural calamities: < Permafrost and thick rock ensure that the seed samples will remain frozen even without power. The Vault is the ultimate insurance policy for the world’s food supply, offering options for future generations to overcome the challenges of climate change and population growth. It will secure, for centuries, millions of seeds representing every important crop variety available in the world today. It is the final back up. > On 19 May 2017, Crop Trust reported that technical issues had resulted in flooding to the facility’s access tunnel: < After 9 years of operation, Svalbard Global Seed Vault is facing technical improvements in connection with water intrusion in the outer part of the access tunnel because the permafrost has not established itself as projected. > This story was propagated across social media with irresistibly shareable headlines like: “The Arctic Doomsday Seed Vault Flooded. Thanks, Global Warming”, leaving the impression that the supposedly failsafe vault had been ruined by one of the very forces it sought to protect against — and after less than a decade of use. This spin is not entirely accurate, however, as the vault itself was never threatened. Crop Trust clarified this in a 21 May 2017 statement: < It has been reported that the Seed Vault has seen water intrusion due to melting permafrost. The Royal Ministry of Agriculture and Food in Norway, the Crop Trust, and NordGen would like to assure seed depositors and the public that the seeds are completely safe and no damage has been done to the facility. The Royal Ministry of Agriculture and Food and Statsbygg, Norway, is taking appropriate measures to ensure the protection of the Seed Vault and improve the construction to prevent future incidents. Globally, the Seed Vault is, and will continue to be, the safest backup of crop diversity. > While the access tunnel was flooded, there are a number of other protective barriers between that tunnel and the actual vault, as described in a Time.com profile of the facility from April 2017: < The entrance leads to a small tunnel-like room filled with the loud whirring noise of electricity and cooling systems required to keep the temperature within the vault consistent. Through one door is a wide concrete tunnel illuminated by strip lighting leading 430 ft. down into the mountain. At the end of this corridor is a chamber, an added layer of security to protect the vaults containing the seeds. There are three vaults leading off from the chamber, but only one is currently in use, and its door is covered in a thick layer of ice, hinting at the subzero temperatures inside. In here, the seeds are stored in vacuum-packed silver packets and test tubes in large boxes that are neatly stacked on floor-to-ceiling shelves. > As described by the Guardian, it was this wide concrete tunnel that was breached: < “A lot of water went into the start of the tunnel and then it froze to ice, so it was like a glacier when you went in,” [Hege Njaa Aschim, a Norwegian government spokesperson], told the Guardian. Fortunately, the meltwater did not reach the vault itself, the ice has been hacked out, and the precious seeds remain safe for now at the required storage temperature of -18C. > 2016 was an especially hot year for the Arctic, and the Spitsbergen Island had average temperatures regularly approaching temperatures 13ºF (7ºC) higher than normal. This allowed the deep permafrost the vault was built into — selected in part because its presence provides a free source of refrigeration — to melt more than usual. Crop Trust has stated that they remain confident in the ability of the Vault in the future, and that they are implementing improvements to protect against similar events: < The vault managers are now taking precautions, including major work to waterproof the 100m-long tunnel into the mountain and digging trenches into the mountainside to channel meltwater and rain away. They have also removed electrical equipment from the tunnel that produced some heat and installed pumps in the vault itself in case of a future flood. > Speaking to the Guardian, Åsmund Asdal of the Nordic Genetic Resource Centre said: < We have to find solutions. It is a big responsibility and we take it very seriously. We are doing this for the world. >

Crop Trust.  “Svalbard Global Seed Vault”   Accessed 23 May 2017.;Carrington, Damian.  “The Arctic Doomsday Seed Vault Flooded. Thanks, Global Warming.”   Wired.  17 May 2017.;Crop Trust.  “Press Statement on the Seed Vault”   Accessed 23 May 2017.;Duggan, Jennifer.  “Inside the ‘Doomsday Vault’”   Time.  7 April 2017.

compound-swim-pool-urine

compound-swim-pool-urine

A special compound added to the water in swimming pools will reveal the presence of urine and catch those who pee in the pool.

No matter what your parents might have told you, there isn’t any magical chemical that when added to a swimming pool will reveal the presence of urine in the water by producing a brightly-colored cloud: < In 1958 I spent two weeks visiting my father in Sacramento, California. At the YMCA pool, I was told by fellow-children that this chemical (colour was red) was in the water. I was told the horrible embarrassment of being “discovered” peeing in the water had happened to a FOAF only “last week.” I never tried it out, obviously. Too terrified to even THINK of it. Never saw red stains in the water, either. > As “Alan” at the Aqua Clear web site says, “There is no chemical that can function as an indicator for urine in a pool.” Others in the industry concur: this belief is all chimera and no substance. Those in the pool supply business are routinely confronted with requests for the “urine-indicator dye” (as the mythical substance has come to be known). The belief in such a chemical spans many countries, as does the juvenile certainty particular pools are spiked with it. Experts on such matters say although a reliable urine-detecting dye could be produced, the trick would be getting it to react only to urine and to not trigger in the presence of similar organic compounds likely present in swimming pools. It’s not a compound anyone appears to be working on either, and with good reason: who’d want it? Kids are kids, and their expected reaction to the news that pissing in the pool would produce bright purple or red trails would be to jump right in with the intent of putting that theory to the test. Especially in a public pool where one’s indiscretions can be blamed on the fellow swimming by, what kid wouldn’t avail himself of the naughty pleasure of invoking billowing clouds of dye? Or, as one old-time Boston-area poolman put it, “If such chemicals did exist, every municipal pool in Boston would be bright purple.” (A heartening thought, that. One could drown Barney, and the body wouldn’t be found for days.) Chalk this belief up as what it is: yet another sneaky parent trick meant to keep kids in check. A similar baseless rumor about naughty perpetrators being caught red-handed (so to speak) has to do with school fire alarms. A number of kids have heard these mechanisms are booby-trapped with a packet of red dye that will spray upon whoever pulls the lever, marking him as the one who did the deed. (Yes, dyes are sometimes used with fire alarms to help catch pranksters who take perverse delight in setting off false alarms, but those dyes have come into widespread use only fairly recently, and they are most commonly used as booby-traps set by investigators who have some idea who the perpetrator is or where he will strike next, not as a permanent feature of the alarms. Most kids who were told that all of their schools’ fire alarms were set to mark anyone who triggered them with a special dye were being hoaxed with a bit of deterrent fiction.) Sightings:  Barbara Leaming’s 1985 Orson Welles — A Biography claims Welles and his pal Charlie MacArthur pulled this “urine-indicator dye” prank on their friends around 1937 and were rewarded with raspberry-colored clouds billowing in the water around the guilty swimmers. In an episode of Nickelodeon’s The Adventures of Pete & Pete (“Splashdown”), a substance called “Wee-Wee See” is used to catch a pool-peeing perpetrator. And the mythical urine-detecting pool chemical also makes an appearance in the 2010 film Grown Ups:

Michel, Roger.  “Myth of a Pool Urine Indicator Scares Pants off Reader.”   The Boston Herald.  22 September 2000  (Arts & Life, p. 44).;Toomey, Paul J.  “Ex-Firefighter Is Charged with Pulling False Alarms.”   The [Bergen] County Record.  30 September 1995  (p. A3).

President Trump violated protocol by not standing or saluting during the playing of "Retreat" during an interview with Sean Hannity.

MOSTLY FALSE

In the midst of President Donald Trump’s repeated criticism of the National Football League and football players and team owners for players kneeling in protest during the national anthem, a left-leaning web site accused Trump himself of disrespecting the flag and a solemn United States military tradition in October 2017. The web site Shareblue reported: < Donald Trump sat and laughed with Fox News host Sean Hannity as the “Retreat” bugle call was played. Tradition dictates that members of the military and civilian leadership stand at attention to respect the U.S. flag during the solemn ceremony. Trump’s act of disrespect occurred during an interview that happened in a hangar at the Air National Guard base in Pennsylvania. Trump referred to the bugle call as a “nice sound,” and asked Hannity if they were playing it “in honor of his ratings.” > The interview was conducted in a hangar at the Air National Guard base at Harrisburg International Airport in Pennsylvania with hundreds of people in attendance. You can watch the interview on the Fox News web site here. The relevant section starts at 18.04. Here’s an excerpted transcript: < Trump: …we have a one percent GDP [growth]. [A bugler begins playing “Retreat” in the background.] Trump: …now I have to tell you, for the last quarter, you had three percent – Hannity: Three-two – Trump: And actually, three-two, they adjusted it upward. [Turns around] What a nice sound that is. Are they playing that for you or for me? [To the crowd] They’re playing that in honor of his ratings, did you see how good is ratings? He’s beating everybody! [Some of the crowd laugh, cheer and applaud, some do not respond.] Hannity: I think they’ll be higher tonight, I’m just guessing. [Bugler continues to play “Retreat.”] Trump: So the fact is that we really – we’re really rocking. [In the background, a large section of the crowd stands up.] Trump: We have 3.2 [percent GDP growth] – now, this next quarter coming up, I believe would have even been better. You know, we haven’t hit threes in a long time. So I guess it was ultimately determined it was 3.2 because they adjust upward, but we got hit with a few hurricanes as you probably heard. That’ll have, I assume, an impact. [Bugler continues to play “Retreat” in the background.] Hannity: Barack Obama was the first president in history that never hit three percent GDP growth in a single year of his presidency, which I think speaks volumes. Trump: Well you know, when I took over we were in the ones [around one percent GDP growth]. [Bugler stops playing “Retreat.”] Trump: And if we hit – think of this – if we hit just one point, if we go up from two to three, we pick up $2.5 trillion, 2.5 trillion – Hannity: to the Treasury – Trump: …and we pick up millions of jobs. [Crowd applauds.] So it pays for the whole thing. So it really pays for it, so I think it’ll be great. [Segment ends, Hannity segways to commercial break.] > As Shareblue correctly points out, the playing of “Retreat” is a very long-standing United States military ceremony, which requires certain standards of decorum for those in attendance, both military and civilian. However, Donald Trump does not appear to have violated protocol during the ceremony. We spoke to an Army National Guard spokesperson, who told us that there is “no expectation” relating to decorum for civilians or armed services members who are indoors during the Retreat ceremony, in any branch of the military. The President was in an airport hangar during the interview. For those who are outdoors on a military installation during the ceremony, there are different rules, which can be found in Air Force Instruction 34-1201. Generally speaking, military service members and government officials are expected to “render appropriate honors” throughout the ceremony. While Trump’s joke that “Retreat” was being played in honor of Sean Hannity’s television ratings could be considered disrespectful by some, he did not violate protocol by failing to stand or face the flag during the ceremony. We asked the White House for comment and an explanation of Trump’s comportment during the playing of “Retreat,” but we did not receive a response by publication time.Â

Hayden, Molly. “‘Retreat’ Ceremony More Than Music.”  United States Army. 29 May 2013.

ben-carson-hurricane-homelessness-gift-heaven

ben-carson-hurricane-homelessness-gift-heaven

Ben Carson told a hurricane victim that "homelessness is a gift from heaven" and a sign that God wanted them to be homeless.

An image circulating online in September 2017 depicted federal Housing and Urban Development (HUD) Secretary Ben Carson as having a less than charitable viewpoint toward hurricane victims. < You see, a hurricane is God’s way of saying you are meant to be homeless. So in a sense, your homelessness is a gift from heaven. > The photograph was likely from a 7 May 2015 meeting between Carson and community leaders in Baltimore. But there is no record of Carson making that statement about hurricane victims. In a September 2017 interview, Carson said that families who receive federal housing assistance would get help in the aftermath of Hurricane Harvey, which caused significant damage in parts of Texas: < We will make sure that they’re all taken care of. In many cases where things have been destroyed, we’ll have to go to some transitional housing first. But yes, we’ll be taking care of all of them. > Carson has also promised that HUD would be “a rapid, responsible and compassionate agency” in its response. A HUD spokesperson told us that around 500,000 homeowners affected by Harvey and Hurricane Irma in Florida currently have mortgages insured by the Federal Housing Administration. Those homeowners are eligible for a 90-day “foreclosure moratorium.” The caption used in the image of Carson could be a play on a remark he actually did make during a May 2017 interview: < I think poverty to a large extent is also a state of mind. You take somebody that has the right mindset, you can take everything from them and put them on the street, and I guarantee in a little while they’ll be right back up there. And you take somebody with the wrong mindset, you can give them everything in the world, they’ll work their way right back down to the bottom. > When asked in September 2015 how he would deal with Hurricane Joaquin, Carson — then a Republican presidential candidate — told reporters, “I don’t know.”

DelReal, Jose A. “Ben Carson Calls Poverty ‘a State of Mind’ During Interview.” Washington Post. 24 May 2017.;NPR. “Harvey Recovery Will Take Time, HUD Secretary Ben Carson Says.” 6 September 2017.;ABC News. “Ben Carson on How He Would Handle Hurricane Joaquin: ‘I Don’t Know.'” 30 September 2015.;YouTube, uploaded by HUDChannel. “Next Steps for Hurricane Recovery: A Video Message from Secretary Carson.” 14 September 2017. https://youtu.be/6kspZTkwz0k

hurricane-irma-faq

hurricane-irma-faq

Hurricane Katrina

An assortment of rumors associated with Hurricane Irma in September 2017.

Hurricane Irma was the second major hurricane of the 2017 Atlantic hurricane season (after Hurricane Harvey), and the storm brought with it dire predictions that prompted mass evacuations, widespread preparedness activity, and strongly-worded warnings: < Whether it will actually endure a storm of that size and violence isn’t clear. As of Friday morning, Hurricane Irma, one of the strongest hurricanes ever measured in the Atlantic Ocean, was predicted to tear through South Florida and up the center of the state. If forecasts hold, it could be the most ferocious storm seen in the Sunshine State since Hurricane Andrew cut east-to-west across its peninsula a quarter-century ago. “Irma has me sick to my stomach,” said Eric Blake, a scientist with the National Hurricane Center, on his personal Twitter account on Thursday evening. “This hurricane is as serious as any I have seen. No hype, just the hard facts. Take every lifesaving precaution you can.” “I have little doubt Irma will go down as one of the most infamous in Atlantic hurricane history,” he added. > As is typically the case with events that can produce widespread damage and destruction, news about Hurricane Irma has been peppered with misinformation, hoaxes, and images of dubious veracity, prompting us to compile some of the most frequently asked reader questions about that potentially devastating weather phenomenon: A: No. Disabled persons who utilize service animals are excluded from hotel and motel “pet policies” under the Americans with Disabilities Act, but that policy applies irrespective of weather conditions. More information about this claim is available here. A: The short answer is no, a dishwasher is not an especially safe place in which to secure valuables and keepsakes during a hurricane. The longer answer is available here. A: Online listings for some airlines initially showed very high prices for flights out of Florida during the approach of Hurricane Irma, but some airlines also later instituted price caps to ensure reasonable and affordable fares for those needing to get out of the state before the storm. A: No, the storm footage seen in a widely circulated video was actually captured in Uruguay in 2016. A: A: No. A news chyron seemingly reporting this information was in fact the product of a build-your-own-prank site. A: Governor Kenneth Mapp did issue an executive order that does authorize the National Guard to seize firearms and other property if he deems it necessary to keep public order. A: No. The details claimed about that movie in a popular viral rumor were all inaccurate. A: No, Despite some putative discussion on the subject, the classification of a Category 6 storm does not exist. No. As the Washington Post reported in an article critical of Limbaugh, the talk radio host accused the news media of exaggerating weather-related dangers but did not suggest Hurricane Irma itself was a hoax. A: No. As of 7 September 2017, Irma’s death toll was 10 (after the storm made landfall in Barbuda).

is-it-illegal-florida-power-home-solar-storm

is-it-illegal-florida-power-home-solar-storm

Bethania Palma

Thanks to lobbying, Florida homeowners were unable to use solar panels during Irma to generate electricity.

In the days immediately following Hurricane Irma making landfall in Florida in early September 2017, many Floridians lost electrical power — including those with solar panels. Shortly after the powerful storm hit, the alternative weekly newspaper Miami New Times offered an explanation as to why those with solar panels, who seemingly should be unaffected by a utility grid failure so long as there is sunlight, were also, quite literally, in the dark.  In a 14 September 2017 article, the New Times reported that thanks to lobbying, the utilities company Florida Power & Light (FPL) had so much undue leverage over when and whether customers could make use of solar panels that they were able to prevent solar users from accessing sun-based electricity in Irma’s aftermath. The New Times reported: < FPL’s lobbying wing has fought hard against letting Floridians power their own homes with solar panels. Thanks to power-company rules, it’s impossible across Florida to simply buy a solar panel and power your individual home with it. You are instead legally mandated to connect your panels to your local electric grid. More egregious, FPL mandates that if the power goes out, your solar-power system must power down along with the rest of the grid, robbing potentially needy people of power during major outages. > Although the “big corporate government/axis of evil” narrative was too juicy for many conspiracy sites to pass up, Floridians are not, in fact, mandated by law to connect solar panels to the power grid. Utility providers are instead required to allow customers to connect their solar panels to the grid for “net metering,” meaning they can enjoy lower utility bills if their homes generate more power than they use, because excess power is sold back to the utility company. Florida statute actually makes it unlawful for any entity block residents from having solar panels. Further, FPL doesn’t “mandate” that solar panels power down if the grid goes offline in a crisis. This is a safety precaution and industry-wide standard put in place to prevent line workers from being electrocuted while restoring power during an outage — and it is not unique to Florida. The “mandate” cited by the New Times is in fact a guideline which reflects this standard and includes an important caveat. The guideline reads (emphasis added): < Renewable generator systems connected to the grid without batteries are not a standby power source during an FPL outage. The system must shut down when FPL’s grid shuts down in order to prevent dangerous back feed on FPL’s grid. This is required to protect FPL employees who may be working on the grid. > We asked Patrick Altier, owner of the Florida-based energy company Solar Trek, to explain further. Altier told us that Floridians who have solar panels on their homes can use energy from the sun during a grid failure — if they purchase additional equipment to prevent volts of electricity from traveling through power lines and harming unsuspecting neighbors or repair crews. To illustrate this, he gave us two scenarios: < In my home, I have a grid-type solar system, meaning when the grid shuts down my solar shuts off. The reason for that is simply common sense and safety. [If it didn’t shut off] I’d be back-feeding up to 600 volts to the utility lines, and a linesman could get killed. Electricity is like water — it takes the path of least resistance. So there’s a current that, if it’s not being used by my home, could back-feed down the utility line for a long ways and be potentially life threatening. The other scenario is, at my office, I have a solar system that’s called a battery-interactive system. When the grid goes down, a transfer switch switches me off the grid and into the battery system, so there’s no way I could back-feed and hurt a utility linesman. What’s happening [with these news stories] is, they’re taking something that was designed as a safety feature and they’re trying to make it look like the utilities are the bad guys when they’re just trying to keep their employees safe. > The reason many homeowners don’t have the additional equipment necessary to allow them to keep their power on when the grid is down is because of the purchasing cost, said Mark Bubriski, director of public affairs for FPL. However, if customers have installed a battery system, such as a Tesla Powerwall or an SMA Sunny Island, they can use their solar panels safely during a grid failure. No laws or mandates prohibit them from doing so. Conspiratorial theorizing about living off-grid is not new and tends to be popular, perhaps because it plays on the always-present American distrust of both governmental and corporate overreach. That perhaps explains why the New Times story struck a nerve — it reports, for example, that “FPL is… allowed to disconnect your panels from the grid without warning you. The company can even put a padlock on it.” It also reports that utilities companies can “charge a $400 or $1,000 application fee for consumers who want to install systems more powerful than 10 kilowatts.”  These are not misleading characterizations, but they make mundane operations seem ominous, Bubriski said. Technically, FPL can shut off power without warning for safety reasons, such as in the case of a fire or other hazard. FPL can also padlock certain inverters on large systems with manual shutoff switches to ensure the only ones able to access it are FPL workers. He also explained that the application fees, particularly the higher ones, wouldn’t affect most customers because the tiered fees only come into play for systems twice the size of the average Florida home. That is not to say FPL hasn’t been criticized — and as with any topic of public interest, there are legitimate concerns to be raised. For example, some have criticized the speed with which FPL restored power after Irma (as of 25 September 2017, all FPL customers who lost power during Irma have been brought back online). And FPL and the local industry at large have been dragged for drafting what critics call favorable legislation. These stories, however, aren’t as clickable as the big-government-big-corporate conglomerate robbing the American public of free energy, which may explain why that is the one that made national headlines despite its mendacity.

Iannelli, Jerry. “Why Didn’t FPL Do More to Prepare for Irma?”   Miami New Times. 14 September 2017.;IFLScience.com. “Thanks to Lobbying, It’s Illegal To Power Your Home With Solar Panels In Florida.”   18 September 2017.;ZeroHedge.com. “In Florida, You Can’t Use Your Own Solar Panels in a Crisis.”   18 September 2017.;Florida Power & Light. “Customer-Owned Renewable Generation Grid Interconnections (FAC-6.065).”;Salisbury, Susan. “After Hurricane Irma: Why Solar Power Can’t Replace Storm-Damaged Grid.”   Palm Beach Post. 18 September 2017.;WTSP. “VERIFY: Can Solar Users Access Panels When Power Grid Is Out?”   21 September 2017.;Salisbury, Susan. “State’s Consumer Advocate Urges FPL Customers to File Complaints.”   Palm Beach Post. 23 September 2017.;Klas, Mary Ellen. “FPL Drafted Portions of Bill That Puts Tough Requirements on Rooftop Solar Companies.”   Miami Herald. 5 April 2017.

"floyd" AND "mayweather" AND "jr" AND "donates" AND "hurricane"

floyd-mayweather-jr-donates-after-hurricane

floyd-mayweather-jr-donates-after-hurricane

Floyd Mayweather (or Manny Pacquiao) donated a sizable sum of money to Hurricane Harvey relief efforts.

On 29 August 2017, houstonchronicle-tv.com (not Houston Chronicle) published an item appearing to report that boxing champion Floyd Mayweather donated $200 million to Hurricane Harvey relief efforts three days after a widely-publicized bout: < There’s a well known saying that “To whom much is given, much is expected” and by all accounts, it appears Floyd Mayweather Jr. knows what he means on the world stage. He’s living up to that expectation. By way of financial support, the newly retired American boxer, Mayweather has offered an overwhelming sum of money to the Hurricane Harvey victims. The World No. 1 undefeated boxer Floyd Mayweather has donated 200 million dollars to help rebuild Houston, after the most populous city in the state of Texas and the fourth-most populous city in the United States was slammed by Hurricane Harvey on Sunday. The donation which will be utilized through his foundation was announced today after he travelled to Houston to ascertain the damage caused by the hurricane. “It is a humanitarian gesture, an act of solidarity and support for a brotherly affected people,” the American boxing hero said. > The item was in part identifiable as fake news by its misleading URL; the actual Chronicle‘s web site is located at Chron.com. Although the story about Floyd Mayweather’s Hurricane Harvey donation had no disclaimer, houstonchronicle-tv.com previously published fake news. The actual Houston Chronicle carried no such story. Variations: On 30 August 2017, readers began asking if Manny Pacquiao had donated a sizeable sum of money to Harvey relief efforts: < I just came across a post on Facebook saying Manny Pacquiao donated $50 million to the hurricane Harvey victims. After reading the article on Scopes about Mayweather, I suppose this one on Pacquiao is also fake news. Manny Pacquiao donates $50 million to Hurricane Harvey victims. [link] > The claim was published by the web site usa360-tv.com, and featured a logo nearly identical to that of the New York Daily News (again, posing as a well-known paper). In addition to structural similarities between the two fake news sites, another veracity-related clue was near-identical verbiage employed by both pages: < There’s a well known saying that “To whom much is given, much is expected” and by all accounts, it appears Manny Pacquiao knows what he means on the world stage. He’s living up to that expectation. By way of financial support, the Filipino professional boxer and politician, Manny Pacquiao has offered an overwhelming sum of money to the Hurricane Harvey victims. One of the World famous boxers Manny Pacquiao has donated 50 million dollars to help rebuild Houston, after the most populous city in the state of Texas and the fourth-most populous city in the United States was slammed by Hurricane Harvey on Sunday. The donation which will be utilized through his foundation was announced today after he travelled to Houston to ascertain the damage caused by the hurricane. “It is a humanitarian gesture, an act of solidarity and support for a brotherly affected people,” the Filipino boxing hero said. >

bbc-pedophilia-journalist-dead

bbc-pedophilia-journalist-dead

The death of former BBC investigative reporter Liz MacKean was "suspicious."

On 20 August 2017, the unreliable web site Your News Wire falsely reported that Liz MacKean, a controversial former BBC journalist, had been found dead “in suspicious circumstances”: < Liz MacKean, the former British investigative reporter who exposed Jimmy Savile and the culture of pedophile protection at the BBC, has been found dead. She was 52…The BBC, who blocked her groundbreaking investigation from airing and spent the next few years attempting to destroy her reputation, are reporting that she died of “complications from a stroke.” Liz MacKean is the second high profile BBC journalist to die in suspicious circumstances after attempting to expose the truth about the pedophile ring operating in the upper reaches of the establishment. Jill Dando, former Crimewatch host, also tried to alert her bosses to the pedophile ring at the BBC, warning that “big name” stars were implicated. Jill Dando, who was 37, was shot dead on April 26, 1999 on the doorstep of her West London home in a crime that still remains unsolved. > MacKean worked for the BBC’s flagship nightly current affairs show Newsnight for 14 years, according to the Guardian. In 2011, she investigated allegations of child sexual abuse by BBC television personality Jimmy Savile. Her Newsnight editor instructed her to drop those investigations. The story was broken by a rival channel and became a massive scandal with far-reaching ramifications. In 2013, MacKean left the BBC. It is true that Dando’s murder has not been solved, but there is no reasonable comparison between that violent death, and MacKean’s death from a stroke, which has been reported by multiple U.K. news organizations as well as the BBC. The Your News Wire article presents no evidence of the “suspicious circumstances” it claims surrounded MacKean’s death from a stroke, which was announced on 18 August 2017. Neither does the article present a rationale as to why MacKean would be killed years after the revelation of historical child sexual abuse at the BBC, which she had investigated before she left the institution in 2013. Your News Wire has a history of publishing false and unsubstantiated stories and conspiracy theories. The claim that Liz MacKean’s death took place “in suspicious circumstances” is the latest.Â

BBC.  “Ex-BBC Reporter Liz MacKean Dies After Stroke.”  BBC News.  18 August 2017.;Grossman, David.  “Liz MacKean Obituary.”  The Guardian.  20 August 2017.;Boyle, Simon.  “Ex-BBC Reporter Who Quit Corporation After Bosses Shelved Her Investigation Into Jimmy Saville Dies Aged 52.”  Daily Mirror.  18 August 2017.

bringing-a-gun-to-a-knife-fight

bringing-a-gun-to-a-knife-fight

President Obama once said that if your opponents bring a (rhetorical) knife to a fight, you should bring a gun.

On 19 July 2016, actor Scott Baio (best known in political circles for his portrayal of Fonzie’s cousin Chachi in the 1970s TV sitcom Happy Days) engaged in a contentious debate on MSNBC with NBC national correspondent Tamron Hall, during which Baio asserted (at approximately the two-minute mark in the video shown below) that President Obama had once said “if they bring a knife to an argument, you bring a gun”: The exchange in question occurred during a debate over civility, and Hall challenged Baio over both his own comments as well as comments made by Donald Trump: < BAIO: Listen, there’s different levels to me. You want me — HALL: I’m asking. BAIO: You want me to be square and nice to everybody. HALL: No, I don’t. I want you to be what you say — BAIO: Wait a minute, wait a minute. I let you talk. HALL: Absolutely. BAIO: Let me talk. And you want me to be sweet and gentle to a man, a president, who says if they bring a knife to an argument, you bring a gun. That’s what President Obama said. Now, if you want me to go after a guy like that — all bets are off at that point. HALL: That’s absolutely not true. But I’ll tell you this. BAIO: That’s an absolute fact. That is a quote. HALL: The person that you support, the person that you support — the person you support said, he could take a gun out on Fifth Avenue and shoot someone in the head, and you would still support him. Is that true? > Hall seemed perplexed by the claim and unaware othat President Obama had stated any such thing (for which Baio provided no context). But Baio wasn’t the first to ascribe the quote to the President in 2016, as shown in an Fox Business News segment that featured a longer version of the quote and dated it as having been uttered on 13 June 2008: < They’re going to try to scare people. They’re going to try to say that ‘that Obama is a scary guy.’ If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun. because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans. > Many social media users were skeptical that the quote was legitimate, and Baio’s manner of describing it didn’t make it easier for viewers to pin down the circumstances under which President Obama might have said such a thing. That was likely due in part to the passage of time (more than eight years had gone by since the date appended to the on-screen transcription), although some people suggested all evidence of the comment had been scrubbed from the Internet. The quote itself was commonly cited as having been sourced from the mob film The Untouchables and also frequently referenced by hip-hop artists. One such instance is the track “Takeover” by Jay-Z, of whom the President is a noted fan. As it turned out, the comment was indeed made by then-Senator Obama at a fundraising event in the City of Brotherly Love, and it was not ignored by mainstream media outlets at the time. The New York Times, reported on 14 June 2008 that: < Senator Barack Obama was fund-raising in Philadelphia. But he was talking about “the Chicago way.” Channeling the mob drama, “The Untouchables,” Mr. Obama said in reference to the general election rumble with the Republicans: “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun.” > On the same date, Reuters published an item that stated, in part: < Democratic presidential nominee Barack Obama, who regularly uses language to reinforce his modern-guy credentials, seems to have set that aside when he explained how he won’t be cowed by Republican attacks. “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a fund-raiser in Philadelphia on Friday, employing a phrase that could have been lifted from a gangster movie. “Because from what I understand, folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans,” he said, referring to the city’s football team. > The Wall Street Journal provided a sliver of additional context to the statement: < Mobster wisdom tells us never to bring a knife to a gun fight. But what does political wisdom say about bringing a gun to a knife fight? That’s exactly what Barack Obama said he would do to counter Republican attacks “If they bring a knife to the fight, we bring a gun,” Obama said at a Philadelphia fundraise. “Because from what I understand folks in Philly like a good brawl. I’ve seen Eagles fans.” Obama made the comment in the context of warning donors that the general election campaign against McCain could get ugly. “They’re going to try to scare people. They’re going to try to say that ‘that Obama is a scary guy,’” he said. A supporter yelled out a deep accented “Don’t give in!” “I won’t, but that sounded pretty scary. You’re a tough guy,” Obama said. > We were unable to locate any video of President Obama’s “knife to a gun fight” remarks, but the comments were well documented in contemporaneous news reports.

Bigg, Matthew.  “Knives, Guns? Obama Says Ready for a Good Brawl.”   Reuters.  14 June 2008.;Kaufman, Gil.  “President Obama Just Can’t Stop Dropping Jay Z Verses.”   MTV.  10 March 2015.;The New York Times.  “Obama: ‘We Bring a Gun.'”   14 June 2008.;Media Matters For America.  “MSNBC’s Tamron Hall Hammers Trump Supporter Scott Baio for ‘Incendiary’ Hillary Clinton Tweet.”   19 July 2016.;The Wall Street Journal.  “Obama: ‘If They Bring a Knife to the Fight, We Bring a Gun.’”   14 June 2008.

camping-world-ceo-trump

camping-world-ceo-trump

In August 2017, Camping World CEO Marcus Lemonis told supporters of President Donald Trump not to shop at his stores.

On 21 August 2017, the right-wing Gateway Pundit web site misleadingly reported that Marcus Lemonis, CEO of the Camping World chain of RV and camping stores, had told supporters of President Donald Trump not to shop at his company’s outlets. Their article, published under the headline “Major NASCAR Sponsor Tells Trump Fans to Take Their Business Elsewhere,” stated: < In recent weeks, several CEOs have distanced themselves from President Trump. Some have left advisory councils. Some have attacked President Trump in the press. But few of them have businesses that serve President Trump’s core supporters. Now, a CEO of a NASCAR sponsor has decided to tell Trump supporters to take their business elsewhere. > The article then quoted at length from an 18 August New England Sports Network (NESN) report: < Marcus Lemonis has no problem with some customers taking their RV and outdoor needs elsewhere … Amid the flood of CEOs rushing to distance themselves from Trump’s business councils after the U.S. president’s wishy-washy denunciation of white supremacy last weekend, Lemonis on Wednesday appeared on CNBC’s “Power Lunch,” where he seemed to suggest he wouldn’t be shattered if people who supported Trump’s comments decided to shop elsewhere. > The NESN article was specific about the context of Lemonis remarks and fairly stated that the CEO did suggest that those who agreed with President Trump’s response to the white supremacist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, should not shop at his stores. However, the headline that accompanied the Gateway Pundit article was misleading and overly broad, suggesting Lemonis had directed his comments at anyone who agreed with President Trump in general, rather than anyone who agreed with him specifically on the subject of Charlottesville. The lack of specificity in Gateway Pundit’s headline was echoed in a subsequent report by the Daily Wire web site, whose headline also falsely claimed “Major NASCAR Sponsor Tells Trump Supporters to Shop Elsewhere …” Marcus Lemonis did not tell or ask Trump supporters, as such, not to shop at his stores; he did, however, appear to suggest that those who agreed with President Trump’s remarks in response to events in Charlottesville should not patronize his business. What Lemonis Actually Said During a 16 August interview for CNBC’s Power Lunch, host Michelle Caruso-Cabrera asked Lemonis (who hosts his own show, The Profit, on the same network) about business leaders’ distancing themselves from the Trump administration in the aftermath of the President’s response to Charlottesville. (President Trump had disbanded two of his business advisory councils after several corporate leaders resigned from them in response to his comments about the ‘Unite the Right Rally’ in Charlottesville. The remark by Lemonis that was seized upon occurred in the following context: < Michelle Caruso-Cabrera: Marcus, you have a consumer-facing business, Camping World. So do you worry about — if you were on one of these [presidential] councils, would you worry, thinking ‘Wow, I’ve got to deal with consumers every day, are they going to look at the business poorly because I’m associated with the White House?’ Marcus Lemonis: There’s no doubt that there is [sic] probably not many consumers in this country today that are in favor of what has been said in the last couple of days and if they are, quite frankly don’t shop at my business. And I think the reality of it is is that there is a fear, there is a fear of association. > Lemonis said that anyone “in favor of what has been said in the last couple of days” should not shop at his business. He did not say anyone who supported President Trump, or even agreed with President Trump in general, should not shop at his stores. In fact, he didn’t even reference President Trump specifically, simply referring generally to “what has been said in the last couple of days.” However, interpreting his comment to mean that anyone who agreed with what President Trump said about Charlottesville should not shop at his stores was a reasonable reading of his remarks, given the context (i.e., he was answering a question about businesses’ distancing themselves from the White House over Trump’s response to the Charlottesville rally) and the fact that earlier in the interview, Lemonis said: “I of course, along with the other CEOs, are horrified by what we’re hearing and seeing from this administration …” We asked Camping World to verify whose comments (and which comments) Lemonis was referring to when he mentioned “what has been said in the last couple of days”, but we did not receive a response in time for publication. What Lemonis Claims He Said On 21 August, Marcus Lemonis released a video message addressing the controversy surrounding his CNBC remarks. In it, he inaccurately described what he said on Power Lunch in the following ways: < For the record, what I said is that if you are OK with what happened in Charlottesville, what was said and what was done, I’m not ok with it. > < So from my position, once and for all, loud and clear – what I said is that if you are ok with what was said in Charlottesville and what was done, then I’m not ok with it. > < I will not change my position, no matter how hurt I get in this situation, that if you are OK with violence and if you are OK with hate and if you are OK with racism of any kind, or bigotry of any kind, or you are trying to hurt people of any kind, I’m not OK with it. > < I’m not moving from my position that violence and hate are not OK from anybody, about anything. > < How I feel over the last several days https://t.co/zku9VyP8dV — Marcus Lemonis (@marcuslemonis) August 21, 2017 > In fact, these are inaccurate descriptions and summaries of what Lemonis said on CNBC. He did not mention “what happened in Charlottesville,” or “what was said in Charlottesville,” nor “being okay with” violence, hatred, racism, or bigotry. He referenced “what was said in the last couple of days” in the context of answering a question about business leaders distancing themselves from the White House after President Trump’s remarks about Charlottesville. It is noteworthy that Lemonis’ CNBC interview took place on 16 August, four days after the white supremacist rally and counter-protest in Charlottesville, but just one day after President Trump’s widely criticized remarks on the rally, in which he said there was “blame on both sides” and that there were “very fine people” on both sides. We also asked Camping World how Marcus Lemonis reconciled his remarks on CNBC with his subsequent descriptions of them, but we again did not receive a response in time for publication. We also asked the company whether Lemonis condemned President Trump’s remarks on Charlottesville, but we did not receive a response to that question either. The views Marcus Lemonis expressed in his follow-up video message may well reflect his considered position on the issue, but they are not what he said on CNBC. Conclusion Lemonis certainly did not say that anyone who supports or generally agrees with President Trump should not shop at his stores. However, contrary to his own inaccurate descriptions of his CNBC interview, Lemonis did strongly appear to have suggested that anyone who agreed with President Trump’s controversial remarks about the events of 12 August 2017 in Charlottesville, Virginia, should not shop at his stores.

Watanabe, Ben.  “Major NASCAR Sponsor Asks Fans Who Agree with Donald Trump to Shop Elsewhere.”   New England Sports Network.  18 August 2017.;Fox, Michelle.  “Marcus Lemonis: If You’re OK with What Trump Said, Don’t Shop at My Business.”   CNBC.  16 August 2017.;Paletta, Damian and Jena McGregor.  “Trump’s Business Advisory Councils Disband as CEOs Abandon President Over Charlottesville Views.”   The Washington Post.  16 August 2017.

wire-hole-drill-thin-company

wire-hole-drill-thin-company

A competitor one-ups a company proud of their new ultra-thin wire by drilling a hole through it.

< The engineering department of a defense plant at Newburgh, New York, has been experimenting with steel wire, drawing it out very fine. They finally produced a piece of 120-gauge wire — practically invisible. The boys were proud — so proud, in fact, that they cut off a strand and sent it to a rival defense plant farther upstate. “This is just to show you what we are doing in Newburgh,” they wrote. Weeks went by. Recently, a package arrived at the Newburgh plant. The boys opened it with great care. Inside was a steel block; mounted on the block were two steel standards, and strung between them was the same piece of 120-gauge wire. At one end of the block was mounted a small microscope delicately focused on a certain spot on the wire. One by one the engineers placed an eye to the microscope and examined in silence the work of their rivals, who had bored, in the wire, a rather handsome little hole! > At first blush, this legend of technological one-upsmanship appears to date to around 1939, yet it is a couple of millennia older than that. As it was being told just prior to World War II, a German manufacturer had asked an American steel company to produce a 4-foot sample of the thinnest wire they could make. The Americans put their most experienced metallurgists and wire-drawers on the job, finally producing what they believed to be a work of technological art. A special courier was dispatched to Germany to deliver the sample and get the reactions of those it had been made for. The courier was welcomed at the plant and given a glass of schnapps while the wire was taken to another room to be examined by German experts. Before the man had finished his drink, the box he’d brought the sample in was returned to him, now sealed with wax. “Your answer is in the box,” he was told. “Please do not open it until you return to your plant.” Stateside once more, the wire was examined by the American engineers who’d slaved over it. They found a hole drilled down its center, effectively turning their solid thin wire into an impossibly-reamed hollow tube. This pre-war incarnation reflected then-current fears of the state of German technology as America contemplated the industrial prowess of the country it knew in its heart would soon be a battlefield opponent. Sometimes Japanese technology was viewed with trepidation; another version starred them as the hole borers. Legends often take on messages of the times. As the clouds of war darkened the pre-World War II sky, those sizing up the enemy and yearning for an acceptable outlet through which to express their misgivings found it in this legend. Later in the war, as Americans became more confident of the technologies they were entrusting their fate to, this legend shifted to become a way of sharing with others their growing sense of confidence by making the story about American firms vying with each other. (Had the conflict lasted any longer, a final version might have emerged that had American engineers humiliating their German counterparts.) In the early 1980s, when fears about Japan’s taking over the U.S. economy were running rampant, the “drilled wire” legend resurfaced in a new setting. As this version went, a American firm had produced an extremely thin glass rod and were proudly displaying this example of their company’s advanced capabilities at a trade show in Texas. A group of Japanese engineers a couple of booths over asked to borrow the rod so they could examine this marvel more thoroughly. The flattered Americans handed it over. Two hours later, the rod was returned with many bows of thanks. A few days later the Americans thought to examine the item more closely and only then discovered a tiny hole had been drilled down the length of it. Yet, as mentioned earlier, this story didn’t begin as a drilled wire tale meant to help give voice to feelings of anxiety about an opponent one country was squaring off against even if that’s the use it was eventually put to. The story appears in Pliny’s Natural History as an anecdote involving the two renowned artists circa 300 B.C., Apelles and Protogenes. Not finding Protogenes at home, Apelles drew a thin, perfect line across a canvas as his way of informing the absent painter who had called. Upon seeing it, Protogenes drew a still finer line in a different color immediately on top of the one left by Apelles. Apelles then ended all dispute by drawing yet a third fine line (in yet another color) between the two lines already on the canvas. Was this a true rendition of an actual event? Pliny claims the canvas (which had supposedly been exhibited as a marvel) was destroyed in a fire at Caesar’s palace on the Palatine, so no evidence survives. We should also note that Pliny (AD 23-AD 79) was writing about an event that, if it occurred at all, would have taken place 3.5 centuries before he attempted to set down an account of it. In one way, the “drilled wire” story is a typical “guy tale” in which one smart fella competes with another in a peacock’s show of who has the brightest feathers. In that sense, it’s timeless. Read another way, the legend exists to remind us that no matter how wonderful we think we are, there’s always someone more skilled out there, and, like mama said, pride does indeed go before a fall. Especially in these days of new technology springing up in every direction, the legend’s caution against ever thinking we’re the cat’s pajamas is direly needed, as today’s complacency often becomes tomorrow’s bankruptcy. Variations:  Sightings:  This legend is mentioned in the 1995 Justin Scott novel, Stone Dust.

Brunvand, Jan Harold.  The Baby Train.   New York: W. W. Norton, 1993.  ISBN 0-393-31208-9  (pp. 174-177).;Brunvand, Jan Harold.  Too Good to Be True.   New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.  ISBN 0-393-04734-2  (pp. 291-292).;Cerf, Bennett.  Try and Stop Me.   New York: Simon and Schuster, 1945  (p. 361).;Feynman, Richard P.  The Pleasure of Finding Things Out.   Cambridge: Perseus, 1999.  ISBN 0-738-20349-1  (p. 138).;Pliny the Elder.  Natural History  (Volume 9).   Cambridge: Harvard University Press, 1952  (pp. 321, 323).

mass-grave-kkk-estate

mass-grave-kkk-estate

Brooke Binkowski

The bodies of dozens of black men were found on the estate of a former Ku Klux Klan member.

On 30 June 2017, a shocking story raced around social media: the twisted, tortured bodies of dozens of black men had been found on what had once been the estate of a prominent Ku Klux Klan leader in Jackson, Mississippi: < A Mass grave of torture victims has been uncovered in Jackson, Mississippi, FBI spokesman Adrian Cartwright said Thursday. A Mass burial site of many dozens of black men, who had been subjected to brutal torture and [then] murdered, has been found,” Cartwright said. “In many cases, body parts are missing; most victims had been shot in the head. Authorities state it’s still very early in the recovery and identification process, but they estimate the grave to be at least 50 years old and contain upwards of 10 bodies. The FBI did not comment on who they believe is responsible or how the bodies got there due to the ongoing investigation. However, Mississippi records list Eldon Lee Edwards a U.S. Ku Klux Klan leader as owning the property from 1945-1953. > Right off the bat, those who read the story might notice several discrepancies. For example, the purported homeowner discovered “some leg bones,” which begs the question of how investigators could know, especially very early into what would clearly be a long and involved identification process, the ethnicity or the ancestry of the victims by their bones alone. (It is possible to for forensic anthropologists to gather clues about the ancestry of long-dead people and build “biological profiles” (a summary of a dead individual’s sex, age at time of death, stature, and health) from bones alone, but teasing out information from human remains takes time and care, and investigators are highly unlikely be so definitive so early in a recovery process.) The article’s text also does not match the headline. Were “dozens” of bodies discovered, or “upwards of 10”?  We could call Adrian Cartwright, the Federal Bureau of Investigation spokesman named in this piece, to confirm the numbers, but alas, no Adrian Cartwright exists at the Jackson, Mississippi, FBI office. Nor does anyone by that name work as a national spokesman for the agency. Further, the image used in the head of the article has nothing to do with Jackson, Mississippi.  It was stolen from a May 2016 VICE News piece (by Nathanial Janowitz, who also took the photograph) about the efforts to exhume and identify victims of narcoterrorism in Morelos, Mexico, who had been dumped into a mass grave by the government years before: Moreover, the image of skeletons embedded in the body of the article was taken from a 6 August 2012 feature in Current Archaeology and shows a partially unearthed medieval-era mass grave from a dig site in Spitalfields, London, England — a long way from Jackson, Mississippi: Eldon Lee Edwards was a real person, an automobile paint sprayer who helped rebuild the U.S. Ku Klux Klan in the 1950s and was known as its Imperial Wizard until his death of a heart attack in 1960. But Edwards was from Atlanta, Georgia, not Jackson, Mississippi, and we were unable to find any evidence that he owned an estate in either state. The Jackson Telegraph is not the online arm of a real newspaper, but merely a fake news site. One of the telltale signs of a fake news site is that the Jackson Telegraph‘s “contact” page provides no physical address, no telephone numbers, no listing of editorial or business staff (or other personnel) — it consists only of a generic e-mail form. While this story is false, racially-based serial murders are not unbelievable and not without precedent, which makes it all the more inflammatory. For example, white serial killer Jeffrey Dahmer (on whom this particular story may have been based) was known to search out black men in particular, which is thought to be one of the reasons that the murders he committed were not initially taken seriously, as the Christian Science Monitor reported in 1991: < But many residents, particularly in the gay and minority communities, say the Dahmer case is focusing attention on long-standing local problems that demand attention. Most of Dahmer’s victims were black, and he often picked up victims in gay bars. The biweekly gay newspaper, Wisconsin Light, printed a special edition to address the anger and fear among local gays. The case is exposing issues such as minority distrust of the police department and general dissatisfaction within the black community. “The Dahmer case has put all this on the front page,” says Donald Leake, president of the Ozaukee County National Association for the Advancement of Colored People. > Â

pedophiles-music-industry

pedophiles-music-industry

Justin Bieber and Katy Perry made public statements warning that the music industry is run by pedophiles.

In early August 2017, articles appeared on unreliable web sites reporting that two of the most popular entertainers in pop music, Justin Bieber and Katy Perry, had made public statements asserting that the music industry is run by pedophiles. (Note: We recognize that pedophilia, which is defined as a sexual attraction to children, is not the same as child sexual abuse, although the web sites under discussion do not observe that distinction.) A YourNewsWire story written by Dmitry Baxter (one of the promulgators of the thoroughly discredited “Pizzagate” conspiracy theory claiming in 2016 that Hillary Clinton and other “Washington elites” ran a pedophile ring out of a pizza restaurant in the nation’s capitol) intimated that the reason Bieber canceled the last leg of his 2017 world tour in July was his realization that pedophilia is rampant in the entertainment business: < Justin Bieber told hundreds of people at a Bible study class in Los Angeles that he has “woken up” to the “evils of the music industry” and he needs to take a break from the industry because it is “controlled by the absolute worst kind of people — pedophiles.” Bieber has become a regular at the Bible study class held at the Montage in Beverly Hills and on Saturday 22nd July he shared what he described as a “horrific story” with the congregation and explained why he felt he had to quit his world tour. Describing a party on tour — attended by the upper echelon of the music business, including executive VPs of development, producers, power agents and international financiers — Bieber said he was encouraged to sexually abuse a young child who had been bought to the party for the sexual gratification of the industry elite. > One day later, a similar article about Katy Perry was posted on the web site Neon Nettle (another hardcore purveyor of “Pizzagate” rumors, not to mention articles falsely attributing statements about show business pedophilia to actor Brad Pitt and implying connections between the deaths of alt-rockers Chris Cornell and Chester Bennington and music industry child abusers): < In a shocking exposé from one of the biggest pop stars in the world, Katy Perry has dealt a devastating blow to the entertainment world elite by revealing that the entire industry is “controlled” by “sick pedophiles”. The “I Kissed a Girl” singer had left many concerned about her mental state following a series of public breakdowns earlier this year. She made headlines when she disclosed her suicidal tendencies and exhibited signs of a split personality disorder, saying “I don’t want to be Katy Perry anymore”. > The article goes on to paint a picture virtually identical to that in the YourNewsWire article of industry pedophiles making up an “exclusive club”: < Clearly troubled by the details, she told a group of close friends: “I can’t live this life any longer. They’re all pedophiles. What they do to these children is sick.” She continues to elaborate, visibly traumatized by the things she’s witnessed: “And they’re every where you go. It’s like they’re not even trying to hide it. They flaunt it like it’s a badge of honor” “The producers, the executives, the big names… They’re all in on it” “It’s like an exclusive club that you can only join if you do these evil things to innocent children… And it’s not just dirty old men, it’s all of them. Even the women.” “They say to me, ‘Katy, you need to take the next step in your career’, but there’s no way I would do those things to kids.” > Despite the fact that both stories include elements of truth to shore up their credibility — Justin Bieber did cancel part of his 2017 tour, for example, and Katy Perry did say in a live-streamed therapy session that she doesn’t want to be “Katy Perry” anymore (i.e., in the sense of having to live up to fans’ expectations) — in neither case are the statements attributed to them about pedophilia sufficiently sourced or corroborated to earn readers’ credence. No such statements by Bieber and Perry have been quoted (or even mentioned) by any mainstream news outlets. On the contrary, these statements are lurid fabrications designed either to garner social media likes and shares (and advertising dollars), or spread disinformation intended to harm the reputations of so-called “Hollywood elites” (a favorite political target of both YourNewsWire and Neon Nettle), or both. Unfortunately, by disseminating these false stories, the web sites dilute and lend confusion to the impact of actual claims of industry pedophilia made by the likes of former child actors Corey Feldman and Elijah Wood, who have separately gone on record saying the extent to which the sexual abuse of minors occurs in Hollywood is underreported. Worse, child abuse is one of those emotion-laden topics that can lead to violence, so there’s no room for false reporting. One would hope that lessons were learned from the Pizzagate debacle, which resulted in a credulous fake news reader firing an AR-15 rifle inside Washington DC’s Comet Ping Pong, a family restaurant; the shooter said he expected to rescue “child sex slaves” from a pedophile ring that does not exist, which was purportedly run out of the restaurant’s basement, which also does not exist. We reached out to representatives of Justin Bieber and Kate Perry for comment, but did not hear back before publication time.

Adl-Tabatabai, Sean.  “Mainstream Media Caught Covering Up Pizzagate Scandal.”    YourNewsWire.   1 December 2016.;Dmitry, Baxter.  “Justin Bieber: Pedophiles Run The ‘Evil’ Music Industry.”   YourNewsWire.  3 August 2017.;Greenberg, Jay.  “Katy Perry: ‘Sick’ Pedophiles ‘Control’ the Music Industry.”   Neon Nettles.  4 August 2017.;Greenberg, Jay.   “Secret Underground Tunnel Network Linking Pizzagate Properties Discovered.”    Neon Nettle.   28 February 2017.;Hauck, Grace.  “‘Pizzagate’ Shooter Sentenced to 4 Years in Prison.”    CNN.   22 June 2017.;Yang, Melissah.  “Justin Bieber Cancels Final Tour Dates ‘Due to Unforeseen Circumstances.'”   CNN.  26 July 2017.

facebook-ai-developed-own-language

facebook-ai-developed-own-language

Concerned artificial intelligence researchers hurriedly abandoned an experimental chatbot program after they realized that the bots were inventing their own language.

It is probably not a coincidence that two of the top-trending news stories of July 2017 were, in the first case, a warning from billionaire tech entrepreneur Elon Musk that artificial intelligence (AI) poses an “existential threat” to human civilization, and, in the second case, the announcement that an AI experiment sponsored by Facebook was, according to some sources, “shut down” after researchers discovered that the chatbots they programmed had begun communicating with one another in a private language of their own invention. Musk, who has previously warned that the development of autonomous weaponry could lead to an “AI arms race”, told the National Governors Association on 15 July 2017 that the risks posed by artificial intelligence are so great that it needs to be proactively regulated before it’s too late. “Once there is awareness,” Musk said, “people will be extremely afraid, as they should be.” Whether he meant it to or not, in some people’s minds Musk’s warning conjured up images of Skynet, the fictional AI network in the Terminator film series that became self-aware and set out to destroy the human race in the interests of self-preservation. Cue the “creepy chatbot” stories. Albeit prompted by a somewhat dry 14 June blog post by Facebook’s Artificial Intelligence Research team (FAIR) describing an inroad in the development of dialog agents (AI systems designed to communicate with humans), the news that chatbots were found to be communicating with each other via a private language received more and more sensationalized treatment in the press as the summer wore on. In a report published the day before Musk gave his speech to the governors, Fast Co. Design delivered a fascinating account of the FAIR team’s experiment with nary a hint of dystopian fear-mongering: < Bob: “I can can I I everything else.” Alice: “Balls have zero to me to me to me to me to me to me to me to me to.” To you and I, that passage looks like nonsense. But what if I told you this nonsense was the discussion of what might be the most sophisticated negotiation software on the planet? Negotiation software that had learned, and evolved, to get the best deal possible with more speed and efficiency — and perhaps, hidden nuance — than you or I ever could? Because it is. This conversation occurred between two AI agents developed inside Facebook. At first, they were speaking to each other in plain old English. But then researchers realized they’d made a mistake in programming. “There was no reward to sticking to English language,” says Dhruv Batra, visiting research scientist from Georgia Tech at Facebook AI Research (FAIR). As these two agents competed to get the best deal — a very effective bit of AI vs. AI dogfighting researchers have dubbed a “generative adversarial network” — neither was offered any sort of incentive for speaking as a normal person would. So they began to diverge, eventually rearranging legible words into seemingly nonsensical sentences. > The key word is “seemingly,” for in this instance the agents’ neologisms were simple, straightforward, and easily decipherable: < “Agents will drift off understandable language and invent codewords for themselves,” says Batra, speaking to a now-predictable phenomenon that’s been observed again, and again, and again. “Like if I say ‘the’ five times, you interpret that to mean I want five copies of this item. This isn’t so different from the way communities of humans create shorthands.” > The article notes that the researchers chose not to let the bots continue developing a private language in favor of programming them to stick to plain English, given that the whole point of the research is to improve AI-to-human communication. That decision took on a more and more sinister vibe as more and more venues reported the story, however, as exemplified in this small sampling of the dozens of blurbs shared via social media: < We gave some AI systems a goal to achieve, which required them to communicate with each other. While they were initially trained to communicate in English, in some initial experiments we only reward them for achieving their goal, not for using good English. This meant that after thousands of conversations with each other, they started using words in ways that people wouldn’t. In some sense, they had a simple language that they could use to communicate with each other, but was hard for people to understand. This was not important or particularly surprising, and in future experiments we used some established techniques to reward them for using English correctly. There have also been a number of papers from other research groups on methods for making AIs invent simple languages from scratch. > As to the claim that the project was “shut down” because the bots’ deviation from English caused concern, Lewis said that, too, misrepresents the facts: < There was no panic, and the project hasn’t been shut down. Our goal was to build bots that could communicate with people. In some experiments, we found that they weren’t using English words as people do — so we stopped those experiments, and used some additional techniques to get the bots to work as we wanted. Analyzing the reward function and changing the parameters of an experiment is NOT the same as “unplugging” or “shutting down AI.” If that were the case, every AI researcher has been “shutting down AI” every time they stop a job on a machine. > The main thing lost in all the hubbub about dialog agents inventing their own language, Lewis said, is that the study produced significant results in terms of its core mission: training bots to negotiate with people, a task that requires both linguistic and reasoning skills: < We introduced a new technique for having bots simulate possible future conversations before deciding what to say (“If I say this, you might say that, then I’ll say this”), and found that this significantly improved their ability on the negotiation task. > We asked, finally, if Lewis and his colleagues see anything inherently dangerous in letting AI systems develop their own languages. He said no. “While it is often the case that modern AI systems solve problems in ways that are hard for people to interpret, they are always trying to achieve the goals that were given to them by people.” William Wisher, who wrote the Terminator films (among others) and who was part of a panel about artificial intelligence and its future at the 2017 San Diego Comic-Con, weighed in on the Skynet scenario, telling us: < Right now, everyone is terrified of AI and project nightmarish scenarios around it, assuming that we are creating our own new overlords. I’ve been part of that in the Terminator films. It makes for a good movie. But what everyone fails to appreciate in these fever dreams is that human beings are the most adaptable, clever, and aggressive predators in the known universe. That really helps me sleep at night. Because I don’t believe AI will ever fully develop as a separate thing from people. I don’t think we’d allow it to. We are in infant stages now, but I think we will subsume AI and make it part of ourselves; better to control it. Implanting neural nets, within our brains that are connected to it, etc. Now that raises all kinds of as yet unseen “have and have not” issues. But that’s another subject for another time. >

Domonoske, Camila.  “Elon Musk Warns Governors: Artificial Intelligence Poses ‘Existential Risk.'”   NPR.  17 July 2017.;Lewis, Michael, et al.  “Deal or No Deal? Training AI Bots to Negotiate.”   Facebook Engineering Blog.  14 June 2017.;Wilson, Mark.  “AI Is Inventing Languages Humans Can’t Understand. Should We Stop It?”   Fast Co. Design.  14 July 2017.

halloween-friday-2017-13-666

halloween-friday-2017-13-666

David Mikkelson

In 2017, Halloween will fall on Friday the 13th for the first time in 666 years.

Although we’re ordinarily loath to trample the life out of simple jokes by dissecting the basis of their humor, the number of “Is this true?” inquiries we receive about this particular item (which is now updated and set loose on the Internet annually) compels us to address it every year: For those who are pondering whether it’s really been 666 years since Halloween last fell on a Friday the 13th, we would point out that the mid-autumnal celebration we know as Halloween does not date back nearly that far (i.e., to the year 1348 or earlier). The word “Halloween” (or “Hallowe’en”) itself originated in the mid-18th century, and the first appearances of the term “All Hallows’ Eve,” from which the word “Halloween” was derived, date only to the mid-16th century. Moreover, none of the harvest festivals or other observances typically cited as precursors of the modern Halloween, such as the Celtic festival of Samhain, the Welsh Nos Galan Gaeaf, or the Christian holiday All Saints’ Day, is known to have ever been specifically or regularly observed on October 13. Those events have (as far as we know) long been associated with the Oct. 31-Nov. 1 timeframe, not a mid-October date. Basically, this is a gullibility joke that plays on the idea of the reader’s failing to make the connection that a holiday observed on the fixed date of October 31 could not possibly ever have fallen on the 13th day of the month (Friday or otherwise). The mention of “666 years” since the last supposed occurrence of that phenomenon is a reference to the number famously cited as the “Number of the beast” described in the New Testament’s Book of Revelation, and of course the selection of Friday the 13th is a nod to the calendar date traditionally considered to be an especially unlucky one in western superstition. Although in October 2017 the 13th day of the month does fall on a Friday, Halloween itself takes place on a Tuesday.

planned-parenthood-satanists

planned-parenthood-satanists

Planned Parenthood and the Satanic Temple have worked together to oppose laws restricting abortion rights in Missouri.

On 13 September 2017, the right-wing web site Breitbart reported that Planned Parenthood had “teamed up” with the Satanic Temple, a group that describes itself as a “nontheistic religious organization,” to reverse restrictions in Missouri on the provision of abortion services. Breitbart’s reporter, Thomas D. Williams, wrote: < Missouri has reportedly doubled its abortion capacity this year “thanks to the Satanic Temple and Planned Parenthood,” who have worked in tandem to fight the state’s restrictions on abortion…The Satanic Temple has often lent its muscle to pro-abortion efforts alongside Planned Parenthood, and in this case has pressured Missouri legislators and worked through the courts to bring about a relaxing of abortion restrictions, according to reports. One of the Temple’s fundamental tenets is that “One’s body is inviolable, subject to one’s own will alone.” > Planned Parenthood and the Satanic Temple have taken separate court cases, both seeking to lower or remove restrictions on abortion rights in Missouri. However, Breitbart’s claim that the two organisations had ‘teamed up’ and “worked in tandem” is false. We searched court records, press releases and statements from both organizations, as well as news coverage of the Missouri campaigns, but we could find no evidence of collaboration between the two groups. The Satanic Temple tweeted on 14 September: < Despite some reports @PPact & TST are independently fighting arbitrary abortion restrictions. There is neither collusion nor competition. — The Satanic Temple (@satanicpsalms) September 14, 2017 > Satanic Temple spokesperson and co-founder Lucien Greaves told us: < Planned Parenthood has not reached out to The Satanic Temple for any purpose, we’ve never shared resources, and we are in no way acting in collaboration, even if some of our efforts are simultaneous as a result of a shared interest in fighting against oppressive reproductive rights restrictions. > Planned Parenthood also confirmed to us that they had not collaborated or shared resources in any way whatsoever with the Satanic Temple. The Planned Parenthood Case In November 2016, Planned Parenthood sued Missouri’s Attorney General, its Director of the Department of Health and Senior Services, and four county prosecutors in an effort to overturn state laws which require abortion clinics to be licensed as “ambulatory surgical centers” and require doctors who perform abortions to have agreements with nearby hospitals to admit or transfer patients there. The laws have had the effect of reducing Planned Parenthood’s capacity to provide abortions in the state to one clinic in St. Louis. The organization argues that these restrictions are not medically necessary and “unconstitutionally burden access to abortion in Missouri.” In April 2017, U.S. District Court judge Jeffrey Sachs ruled in favor of Planned Parenthood, and on 11 September 2017, the organization announced it had been licensed to provide abortion services at a second location in Kansas City, and that it would reopen a third clinic in Columbia. Missouri Attorney General Randall Williams is appealing the case. The Satanic Temple has played no part whatsoever in this lawsuit. The Satanic Temple Case The religious group has taken a separate case on both the state and federal levels seeking to overturn Missouri’s informed consent and 72-hour waiting period requirements for women seeking abortions. The case revolves around a Missouri Satanic Temple member named as Mary Doe, who argues that the state is violating the Establishment and Free Exercise clauses of the First Amendment, which forbid the state from endorsing  a particular religious viewpoint or curtailing an individual’s right to exercise and follow their personal religious beliefs. Missouri is doing this, Mary Doe argues, by forcing women to read a booklet which includes religiously-founded claims that human life begins at conception and that abortion therefore entails the destruction of a separate human life, a stance which is reenforced, in her view, by requiring women to look at an ultrasound of the fetus and then wait 72 hours before they can proceed with an abortion. She also argues that this set of requirements violates her right to live according to her personal religious beliefs, which include the conviction that “a woman’s body is inviolable and subject to her will alone.” In July 2016, a judge dismissed the case on the basis that Mary Doe was by then no longer pregnant and therefore no longer had standing to sue. However, the Satanic Temple has appealed this decision, and the case has gone before the 8th Circuit Court of Appeals. A similar case is moving forward at the state level. We could find no evidence of Planned Parenthood taking any part or making any intervention in either of these court cases. In October 2017, an investigation by Buzzfeed revealed that the Breitbart article containing the false ‘teaming up’ claim was prompted by an email to the web site from Mitchell Sunderland, who was then managing editor of Vice’s Broadly platform.Â

United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.  “Comprehensive Health of Planned Parenthood Great Plains et al vs. Peter Lyskowski et al. Complaint.”  United States District Court for the Western District of Missouri.  30 November 2016.;Planned Parenthood Great Plains.  “Planned Parenthood Great Plains Midtown KC Health Center Receives Abortion License.”  Planned Parenthood.  11 September 2017.;Autrey, Judge Henry Edward.  “The Satanic Temple et al vs. Jeremiah ‘Jay’ Nixon et al – Opinion, Memorandum and Order.”  United States District Court Eastern District of Missouri – Eastern Division.  15 July 2016.;United States District Court Eastern District of Missouri – Eastern Division.  “The Satanic Temple et al vs. Jeremiah ‘Jay’ Nixon et al – Complaint.”   United States District Court Eastern District of Missouri – Eastern Division.  23 June 2015.;Bernstein, Joseph. “Alt-White: How the Breitbart Machine Laundered Racist Hate.”  Buzzfeed. 5 October 2017.

muslim-federal-judge-sharia

muslim-federal-judge-sharia

Bethania Palma

A Muslim federal judge has implemented "two items" of sharia law in the United States.

On 24 July 2017, fake news site AsAmericanAsApplePie.org published a story reporting that a Muslim federal judge named “Mahal al Alallaha-Smith” had imposed “two items” of sharia law (which are religious codes governing conduct within Muslim communities) in the United States. The article seems crafted to exploit a conspiracy theory among those who fear practitioners of Islam that sharia law is “creeping” into U.S. court systems, and that it will soon be forced upon American citizens as the new law of the land. However, the article is made up entirely of falsehoods — including a digitally manipulated image of an actual Los Angeles Superior Court judge with a fake name superimposed over his actual name and, of course, a fabricated quote attributed to him: < Judge Mahal al Alallaha-Smith of the 22nd District Federal Court of Appeals ruled this morning that two “critical issues for Muslims” in Sharia Law had to be abided by in the United States court system because of the systematic infusion clause and because the 14th Amendment guarantees them the rights guaranteed by other states. … The items Judge Alallaha-Smith refers to are: -A man who finds his Godly wife in the arms of another may beat her in a non-life-threatening manner as prescribed by the Koran. The punishment of death for laying with another man in her own bed cannot be enforced on American soil, but the woman can be beaten daily for a period of ten years. -A family in need of expansion shall allow the marriage of first cousins for one generation as prescribed by the Koran. Women in those families can marry as young as 9 but won’t be allowed to consummate until they hit maturity as prescribed in the Koran. Until this is fast-tracked to the Supreme Court, which can sometimes take years, Muslim women in America will be at risk. > After a quick inspection of the web site’s own “About” page, the fictional content should be no surprise. It reveals that AsAmericanAsApplePie.org is not a reliable source of information — in fact, if one scrolls down far enough it is finally apparent that the page labels itself as satire: < When no one can trust the lying fake news liberal media anymore because they hate us and guns and Harley Davidson and meat and OUR president, As American as Apple Pie is here to be your beacon of something you can kinda rely on sometimes but not really. > The image the site uses to represent Judge Mahal al Alallaha-Smith is stolen from a CNN report about a real person — Los Angeles Superior Court Judge Halim Dhanidina. Court spokeswoman Mary Hearn pointed out that Dhanidina is not a federal judge, but rather a sitting judge for the Los Angeles Superior Court, which is “a trial court for the state of California… California trial courts hear state matters, not federal.” Further, the nomenclature used by AsAmericanAsApplePie.org for the Court of Appeals is incorrect, as no “22nd District Court of Appeals” exists. The appellate courts are organized into twelve regional circuits and one federal circuit. There is also no “systematic infusion clause”, whatever that means, to any amendment in the U.S. Constitution. (The 14th Amendment mostly deals with issues relating to citizenship, not religious beliefs.) Finally, laws dictating the legality of marriages between cousins are determined at the state level. We could find no evidence to support the idea that a new legal statute has been implemented in which criminally assaulting a woman would be legally permissible because of her husband’s supposed religious beliefs. The article is made up of a series of fabricated claims by a satire site and is not based on any fact whatsoever — the image, name and quotes from the alleged “Muslim judge” were all falsely presented, and his alleged occupation on the “22nd District Court of Appeals” is made up. In fact Dhanidina, the real judge featured by CNN in 2016, specifically said his religious beliefs have no bearing on how he performs his role in the justice system. The writer of the fake article, in keeping with the theme of this satire site, uses the name “Flagg Eagleton“. Other fake news items authored by Flagg include an article reporting that North Korea’s autocratic leader Kim Jong Un was killed in a bomb drop ordered by President Donald Trump and another reporting that a crowd cheered outside a hospital as Trump’s 2016 rival Hillary Clinton “takes her last breath.” The lack of facts has not stopped numerous people from credulously sharing the article and their own anti-Muslim sentiments along with it. One Fox News viewer took to Judge Jeanine Pirro’s fan page and wrote with alarm: < AMERICAN’S MUST OBJECT TO MUSLIM’S BEING ALLOWED INTO THE GOVERMENT IN ANY WAY SHAPE OR FORM ! WAKE UP AMERICA !!! HURRY Judge Mahal al Alallaha-Smith of the 22nd District Federal Court of Appeals ruled this morning that two “critical issues for Muslims” in Sharia Law had to be abided by in the United States court system because of the systematic infusion clause > Commenters on the site’s own Facebook page also seemed unaware of its status as a satire and entertainment site, with vitriolic responses calling for the (fake) judge’s removal from his (fictional) position, and saying, predictably, that Muslim people should not be allowed to serve as judges in the United States

Eagleton, Flagg. “Muslim Federal Judge Rules Two Items Of Sharia Law Legal.”   AsAmericanAsApplePie.org. 24 July 2017.;AWD News.  “Muslim Federal Judge Rules Two Items Of Sharia Law Legal.”    25 July 2017.;Lah, Kyung.  “Being a Muslim Judge in the Age of Trump.”    CNN.  6 July 2016.;Fuchs, Chris.  “Obama Nominates Possible First Muslim-American Judge to Federal Court.”    NBC News.  7 September 2016.;Cheney, Kyle.  “Trump: Muslim Judge Might Not Be Fair to Me Either.”    Politico.  5 June 2016.

little-girl-opens-door-hurricane-ophelia

little-girl-opens-door-hurricane-ophelia

A mishap involving a little girl, a swinging door, and a gust of wind was caught on video during Hurricane Ophelia.

MISCAPTIONED

As Hurricane Ophelia barreled toward Ireland in mid-October 2017, an animated image of a little girl desperately clinging to screen door blown open by the storm winds circulated online in conjunction with the hashtag #Ophelia: < And they thought keeping the kids off school today would help… #Ophelia pic.twitter.com/qtV4YzLuzE — Barry O’Rourke (@orourke28) October 16, 2017 > Although the scene depicted in this footage truly did occur, it did not take place in Ireland during Hurricane Ophelia, as October 2017 social media postings suggested. The video had been captured by a security camera during a windy day in Cleveland, Ohio, several months earlier, and the girl’s mother, Brittany Gardner, posted it to Facebook  on 8 March 2017. After that March 2017 post went viral, Gardner appeared on both the Today Show and CNN to talk about it. Gardner assured worried viewers that her daughter was not hurt in the incident: < “She is totally OK,” said Brittany. “She was scared at first, then was laughing away at it. She held on until I took her off the handle.” > The original version of the video can be viewed here. Â

Loreno, Darcie.  “Surveillance Video Shows Little Girl Being Blown Away in Yesterday’s Heavy Winds.”   WJW-TV.  9 March 2017.

confederate-soldiers-veterans

confederate-soldiers-veterans

Congress passed laws in 1929 and 1958 designating all Confederate soldiers as United States veterans, making it illegal to remove monuments to the Confederacy.

MOSTLY FALSE

In August 2017, a national debate about the display of Confederate flags and monuments once again gained steam after a protest of the planned removal of a statue of Confederate General Robert E. Lee from a park in Charlottesville, Virginia turned deadly. In the wake of that incident, several cities (and protestors) moved to quickly take down monuments, statues, and plaques. Meanwhile, rumors appeared that Congress had passed two laws retroactively declaring Confederate soldiers United States veterans, which means that removing the statues is illegal. Some of the claims were bolstered by a link to an extremely dubious web site: < Confederate soldiers, sailors, and Marines that fought in the Civil war were made U.S. Veterans by an act of Congress in in 1957, U.S. Public Law 85-425, Sec 410, Approved 23 May, 1958. This made all Confederate Army/ Navy/ Marine Veterans equal to U.S. Veterans. Additionally, under U.S. Public Law 810, Approved by the 17th Congress on 26 Feb 1929 the War Department was directed to erect headstones and recognize Confederate grave sites as U.S. War dead grave sites. Just for the record the last Confederate veteran died in 1958. So, in essence, when you remove a Confederate statue, monument or headstone, you are in fact, removing a statue, monument or head stone of a U.S. VETERAN. > The rumor also appeared as a meme on the Facebook page “Uncle Sam’s Misguided Children” on 16 August 2017: The same image was previously shared by the same Facebook page in a July 2015, just after a gunman in Charleston, South Carolina, killed nine black churchgoers. According to the meme, two acts of Congress (Public Law 810 of 1929 and Public Law 85-425 of 1958) bestows upon Confederate soldiers the benefits and status of a United States military veteran. Public Law 810 refers to Part II, Chapter 23 of U.S. Code 38 which says that the government should, when requested, pay to put up monuments or headstones for unmarked graves for three groups of people: < (1) Any individual buried in a national cemetery or in a post cemetery. (2) Any individual eligible for burial in a national cemetery (but not buried there), except for those persons or classes of persons enumerated in section 2402(a)(4), (5), and (6) of this title. (3) Soldiers of the Union and Confederate Armies of the Civil War. > No portion of the law appears to confer any privilege other than markers for graves of Confederate soldiers, nor does it grant Confederate soldiers status equal to those of veterans of the United States military. As of 1901, 482 individuals (not all soldiers) were already interred in the Confederate section of Arlington National Cemetery. In 1868, President Andrew Johnson pardoned Confederate soldiers, but did not grant them U.S. veteran status. Public Law 85-425 was passed 23 May 1958, entitling the widows of deceased Confederate soldiers (what few were left by 1958) to military pensions: < To increase the monthly rates of pension payable to widows and former widows of deceased veterans of the Spanish-American War, Civil War, Indian War, and Mexican War, and provide pensions to widows of veterans who served in the military or naval forces of the Confederate States of America during the Civil War. > A National Archives and Records Administration document details the matter of Confederate soldiers and pensions, and shows that the law seems to recognize those who fought for the Confederacy as veterans of a war, but not necessarily of the United States military. The last recorded Confederate soldier deaths were in 1959, meaning that the 1957 law had negligible effects for those under its provisions, and in any event the law again conferred no status or other benefit to Confederate soldiers themselves. We reached out to several historians, none of whom wished to be quoted on the record. Several were dubious about the purported laws. One, a scholar who specializes in the Civil War and Reconstruction, told us that he, too, had trouble locating them: < [It’s] clear that Public Law 85-425, section 410 of 1958 was intended solely to provide a symbolic, Civil War Centennial gesture late-life pension to Walter Williams, the supposed only surviving Confederate veteran, and did not apply in any way to any other Confederate soldiers. Of course it turned out (as many people knew then) that Williams was not, in fact, a Confederate veteran – but the desire to still have a living link to the War proved more important than fact. I have been no more successful than anyone else in finding the supposed Public Law 810 passed in 1929. But, given my experience with other claims based on legislation introduced or passed in Congress during that era, I would surmise that any such law was symbolic and meant as a gesture. On the other hand, there was the 1906 Foraker Law that began Federal involvement in caring for Confederate graves. You have probably seen this VA publication [PDF] and consulted John Neff’s important work, Honoring the Civil War Dead (University Press of Kansas, 2005) about that issue. Neff makes clear that Federal money spent on maintaining Federal graves always kept the distinctions between the graves — and the service — of Federal versus Confederate soldiers. [There is, however] the decision in the case of Patrick G. Griffin, III vs. Department of Veterans Affairs issued by the US Court of Appeals 4th District … the decision ultimately affirmed the VA’s contention that the Confederate prisoners buried at Point Lookout were buried and honored as American soldiers and, therefore (the issue before the court) there was no obligation to allow Confederate flags to fly over their graves. > The cited ruling did not recognize the flag of the Confederacy as a legitimate American flag suitable for display in veterans’ memorials. The Veterans’ Affairs document to which the historian pointed, Federal Stewardship of Confederate Dead, contained historical context about Confederate burials and the evolution of federal involvement in the interment of their dead, and included President William McKinley’s 1898 remarks to legislators in Georgia, noting that was a time when “no disabled Confederate veteran was eligible to live in a federal soldier’s home, receive a pension, or, when they died, be buried in a national cemetery”: < The Department of War had been content to allow Northern cemeteries where Confederates were interred to languish. However, after the Spanish-American War (1898), the federal government, led by President William McKinley, in the spirit of national reconciliation and in the postwar glow of recent victory, proposed that a loving nation would reach out and care for the graves of fallen Confederates. Recognition of these places as hallowed ground and the individuals interred in them as deserving of honor began with the creation of the Confederate section at Arlington National Cemetery in 1900, and continued with the renewal through 1916 of 1906 legislation that authorized federal funds to mark all Confederate graves. > Until the turn of the 20th century, United States government interment of Confederate soldiers generally involved deceased prisoners buried during the Civil War on Union lands. In 2013, The Atlantic reported that the United States government continued to follow through on its subsequent promises to provide for all Confederate war dead: < Providing headstones for America’s fallen soldiers is a tradition that goes back to laws passed in 1867 and 1873 that ordered the Department of War to properly establish national cemeteries and furnish graves with headstones … It wasn’t until the 20th century, though, that Confederate veterans were included in this tradition. It started with legislation passed in 1906, at first providing headstones for a very limited number of Confederate veterans, specifically prisoners of war, “who died in Federal prisons and military hospitals in the North and who were buried near their places of confinement.” That mandate for the Department of War was expanded to all Confederate graves with a law passed in 1929. Responsibility for headstones was transferred to the VA in the National Cemeteries Act of 1973, which declared, “The Administrator shall furnish, when requested, appropriate Government headstones or markers at the expense of the United States for the unmarked graves of” a number of categories of veterans and those who’d served the country or were buried in a national cemetery, including specifically, “Soldiers of the Union and Confederate Armies of the Civil War.” It’s no coincidence that many of these changes in attitude and law, and the erection of so many Confederate monuments and memorials, occurred around the turn of the 20th century. They followed the federal withdrawal from the South in 1877, a strategic retreat from the failed policies of reconstruction. > When a debate over Confederate monuments and flags came under the national spotlight in June 2015, codified changes in burials and pensions enacted in 1929 and 1958 were puffed up to suggest that a nebulous act of Congress, either in the 1920s or the 1950s, officially declared that Confederate soldiers were the same as United States veterans in the eyes of the federal government. However, no legislation either explicitly or implicitly granted Confederate soldiers status as United States veterans. Survivors of dead Confederate soldiers often took offense at measures appearing to equate them to Union soldiers, objections that died off as Southerners from the Civil War era did.

Sturgis, Sue.  “Busting The Myth That Congress Made Confederate Vets Into U.S. Vets.”   Facing South.  24 July 2015.;Weiss, Steven I.  “You Won’t Believe What the Government Spends on Confederate Graves.”   The Atlantic.  19 July 2013.;U.S. Code, Title 38.  “Part II, Chapter 23, § 2306: Headstones, Markers, And Burial Receptacles.”   Accessed 23 August 2017.;85th Congress, H.R. 358.  “Public Law 85-424.”   23 May 1958.;Messages and Papers of the Presidents: Andrew Johnson.  “Proclamation 179—Granting Full Pardon And Amnesty For The Offense Of Treason Against The United States During The Late Civil War.”   25 December 1868.;Arlington National Cemetery.  “Confederate Memorial.”   Accessed 23 August 2017.;U.S. Department of Veterans Affairs, National Cemetery Administration.  “Federal Stewardship Of Confederate Dead.”   July 2016.;National Archives and Records Administration.  “Pensions For Military Service In The Army Of The Confederate States Of America.”   Accessed 23 August 2017.

sunscreen-eyes-eclipse

sunscreen-eyes-eclipse

During the August 2017 solar eclipse, some people in California applied sunscreen to their eyeballs in a mistaken attempt to protect their eyes from damage.

After the solar eclipse that crossed the United States on 21 August 2017, several national and international news organizations reported that people had applied sunscreen to their eyes in the mistaken hope of avoiding damage during the eclipse. For example, Fox News reported “Health professionals report cases where people put sunscreen on their eyeballs to watch eclipse.” Forbes magazine wrote “For the eclipse, people put sunscreen on their eyeballs” and in the UK, the Independent wrote “Eclipse 2017: People treated for putting sun tan lotion on eyeballs to watch solar event”. All of these stories depend on one thing: the unverified account of a single person in one location who related what a colleague had purportedly told her. On 22 August 2017, the day after the eclipse, the Redding, California television news channel KRCR published a report which quoted a local nurse practitioner: < According to Redding Nurse Practitioner Trish Patterson, some people have reported pain after they put sunscreen in their eye’s Monday because they did not have protective glasses to watch the eclipse. “One of my colleagues at moonlight here stated yesterday that they had patients presenting at their clinic that put sunscreen on their eyeball, and presented that they were having pain and they were referred to an ophthalmologist,” Patterson said. > We attempted to contact Patterson on more than one occasion but were unable to track her down, so we were unable to ask her for evidence that might support or corroborate her claim or to speak to the colleague who purportedly told her about the patients. Therefore, we cannot say whether anyone in the Redding, California area did in fact apply sunscreen to their eyes in advance of the solar eclipse in August 2017. It is certainly possible, but it is also possible that a miscommunication (including the possibility of a misunderstood joke or undetected irony) happened at several stages: between Patterson and the KRCR reporter; between Patterson and her colleague; and between her colleague and someone else, if the colleague was not present when the patients purportedly presented themselves. We contacted an ophthalmologist and three urgent care clinics in Redding, California (other than Patterson’s own), and none of them reported seeing any patients with any eye damage related to the solar eclipse. We also tried to find other instances of people putting sunscreen on their eyeballs  by selecting 13 cities across the United States where the eclipse coverage was similar to that in Redding (around 86 percent of the sun was covered), and calling urgent care clinics and ophthalmologists. None reported seeing any patients who had applied sunscreen to their eyes. In fact, only one said they had seen “a few” patients with any sort of eye damage from the eclipse. Interestingly, two ophthalmologists told us they had seen patients who complained of eye damage after the eclipse, but after inspection it turned out none of them actually had any injury. This is obviously a small sample, but it could suggest that the purported incidents in Redding, California — if they did take place at all — were extremely rare.  Â

manchester-attack-false-flag

manchester-attack-false-flag

Bethania Palma

The suicide bombing attack at the Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England was a hoax.

On 22 May 2017, various conspiracy theories began to emerge on the Internet pushing narratives that a suicide bombing attack that killed 22 people at an Ariana Grande concert in Manchester, England was either a hoax or a “false flag” — a mass tragedy staged by the government (or governments) to manipulate the public. One such widely-shared video was posted to YouTube the same day of the attack, and has since been viewed thousands of times. In it, a male narrator concludes that the attack was a hoax, because he takes at face value the words of an announcer who was trying to calm a panicked crowd at Manchester Arena by assuring them there was no need to run in the aftermath of the explosion. The conspiracy video can be viewed here: < Ladies and gentleman, please take your time. There’s no need to bunch up. There’s no problems here. Just take your time and exit the building. There’s no need to bunch up and run. Take your time, there’s no problems here. Thank you for coming and having a good time tonight. Everything is fine. Just take your time in exiting the building. Thank you very much. Walk slowly, there’s no need to run. > < Me and a friend trying to exit Manchester Arena while the staff were telling everyone to keep calm and not run #scary #arianagrande pic.twitter.com/r9GFZpOe4D — alex (@butterywig101) May 22, 2017 > The explanation for the announcer’s verbiage is simple. After the explosion, footage from inside Manchester Arena shows panic, with people running for the building’s exits. This is recipe for a stampede, and the announcer was trying to prevent that from happening — and may well have succeeded. After posting the video in which the announcement can be heard, the same Twitter user said people did slow down in order to listen to him: < We were trying to get out as quick as possible but people were stopping to listen to he announcement so it was difficult to — alex (@butterywig101) May 22, 2017 > But the narrator of the conspiracy video took the announcer’s words literally, saying that by directing people not to crowd and panic, he inadvertently revealed nothing had actually happened: < Supposedly 19 killed, 50 injured by a massive explosion, and this man says over the P.A. ‘don’t panic, don’t run, don’t bunch up, there’s no problem here.’ See the problem here? This is nothing but a fabricated hoax, and this of course, this audio he’s saying wasn’t meant to be captured of course and to be put out for public consumption. It doesn’t jive of course with the narrative that this was a of course terrorist attack… ‘Everything is fine.’ And everything is fine… This is an open and closed case, right off the bat. > The conspiracy video’s narrator states his belief that the attack was staged as part of a series of fake tragedies to control the masses. This is demonstrably false. Greater Manchester Police confirmed that they have spoken to grieving families of the 22 deceased and that the coroner is performing postmortem examinations. Once this is complete, identities of the victims will be made public. Police are actively investigating the attack and have taken multiple people into custody. There is also ample footage taken by concert goers that shows everything from the moment the bomb exploded to people scrambling for safety. Authorities have identified the suicide bomber as 22-year-old Salman Abedi, a British citizen who had been on their radar for his extremist views. In an e-mail, Manchester police panned the suggestion the attack was a hoax. They told us: < We are currently dealing with a live investigation into the attack which has left 22 innocent people dead.  We take great offence to any suggestion that the attack on the Manchester Arena is some sort of ‘false flag’ or ‘drill’, as I’m sure the rest of the people of Manchester and the families of the victims would. > Another iteration of the conspiracy theory was posted by notorious fake news-generating web site, YourNewsWire. The post pushes the baseless “false flag” conspiracy that the British government knew about the attack beforehand and even practiced for it days earlier but did nothing to prevent it, as evidenced by a terror attack drill at Manchester mall days earlier: < British intelligence and law enforcement were aware of plans to kill as many people as possible at the O2 Arena in Manchester, but rather than apprehend the terrorist, they let him kill 19 people, and the death toll may yet rise. Britain’s open borders have provided the elite with the useful terrorists necessary to do their dirty work for them. British intelligence and law enforcement ‘allowed’ this attack to happen in order to justify cracking down on the innocent population even further, taking away more and more civil liberties, until we are living in a police state. > As “evidence” the article points to a year-old video from RT (formerly Russia Today, a Kremlin-funded television station) that depicts a drill conducted by police at Trafford Centre in Manchester the evening of 9 May 2016. But YourNewsWire either misread the year, or is deliberately misleading readers by claiming that the drill occurred “less than two weeks” before the 22 May 2017 suicide bombing attack at the concert: < Less than two weeks after RT posted footage of crisis actors preparing for a terrorist attack in Manchester, a radical Islamic terrorist carried out a bloody attack on young girls, and it was allowed to happen. Terrorists are walking freely into our countries and being allowed to perform barbaric acts that terrorize good, law-abiding citizens. In some cases law enforcement and intelligence actually assist the terrorists. > According to The Guardian, the 2016 drill was meant to mimic similar attacks in Paris and Brussels and included 800 volunteers. This is no surprise — the terror threat level in the United Kingdom has been “severe” since 2014, which means authorities believed an attack was “highly likely.” After the Manchester suicide bombing the level was raised to “critical” meaning an attack is “imminent.” Practicing for the likely event of a terrorist attack in a country that has been on alert for that very thing is hardly suspect. British authorities are actively investigating the Manchester attack and as of 24 May 2017 have taken seven people into custody as they work to head off further tragedies. There is no credible evidence supporting the claim the tragedy was a hoax or a “false flag”, and YourNewsWire has a long track record of promoting false information.

Smith, Rory, and Chan, Sewell. “Ariana Grande Manchester Concert Ends in Explosion, Panic and Death.”   The New York Times. 22 May 2017.;Shapiro, Emily, et al. “5th Arrest in Manchester Bombing as Police Look for Role of ‘Network’ in Attack.”   ABC News. 24 May 2017.;Nazaryan, Alexander. “Seth Rich Conspiracy Theorists Claim Ariana Grande Attack Was a False Flag.”   Newsweek. 23 May 2017.;Halliday, Josh. “Terror Training Exercise Staged at Trafford Centre.”   The Guardian. 10 May 2016.;Dmitry, Baxter. “Ariana Grande Massacre: Authorities ‘Rehearsed’ Attack Weeks Before.”   YourNewsWire. 23 May 2017.;Benhold, Katrin, et al. “Police Investigate ‘Network’ of Salman Abedi, Manchester Bomber.”   The New York Times. 24 May 2017.;The Telegraph. “UK Terror Threat Raised to Critical: Here’s What It Means.”   24 May 2017.

obama-texas-during-hurricane-harvey

obama-texas-during-hurricane-harvey

Former President Barack Obama was in Houston serving food to people affected by Hurricane Harvey.

MISCAPTIONED

On 26 August 2017, Twitter user Aiden Benjamin posted a picture he claimed showed former President Barack Obama helping people affected by Hurricane Harvey in Texas. Benjamin posted the picture three times, with his first post garnering more than 7,000 retweets. The caption read: < #HurricaneHarvey #PrayForTexas “Rockport” Something youll [sic] never see trump do: Obama is in texas serving meals! > Benjamin posted the picture two more times, each with captions criticizing Obama’s successor, President Donald Trump. The photograph quickly went viral. This photograph does show President Barack Obama serving food to people in need, but it was not in 2017, nor did it show people displaced by a hurricane. The picture was actually taken on 25 November 2015, when he and his family served meals to homeless U.S. military veterans during an event at St. Luke’s Methodist Church in Washington D.C. There is no indication Obama has been in Texas since the hurricane made landfall, but he did post a link on Twitter encouraging his followers to donate to the American Red Cross. On 28 August 2017, Benjamin posted: < I took down the tweet of obama [sic], I apologize to people who thought it was real. also to @callrail I apologize! > We asked him whether he knew the picture of Obama was not taken in 2017 when he posted it. He has yet to respond.

The Washington Post. “Obama Family Serves Homeless Veterans on Thanksgiving Eve.” 26 November 2015.

polish-first-lady-trump-handshake

polish-first-lady-trump-handshake

At an event in Warsaw on 6 July 2017, Polish First Lady Agata Kornhauser-Duda refused to shake hands with Donald Trump.

On 6 July 2017, video emerged of Donald and Melania Trump’s meeting with Polish President Andrzej Duda and First Lady Agata Kornhauser-Duda, in Warsaw. Several reports focused on a short clip in which the four exchanged greetings, with Kornhauser-Duda shaking Melania Trump’s hand, while the U.S. president extended his own. Newsweek published a story with the headline: “Watch Donald Trump Handshake Rejected by Polish First Lady in Hilariously Awkward Exchange”; Vanity Fair‘s article was titled “The First Lady of Poland Smoothly Avoided Shaking Donald Trump’s Hand”; and the Financial Express web site’s story proclaimed: “Donald Trump Snubbed, Now Poland [sic] First Lady Refuses Handshake, Chooses Melania Instead”, adding: < The incident took place during his Poland visit when the First Lady of Poland declined to shake hands with him and chose to greet the FLOTUS instead. > Many reports and social media posts used a short clip of the encounter: < Trump left hanging by the Polish First Lady. https://t.co/XfdpD2Ix6G pic.twitter.com/5fVtfzEa7p — Imgur (@imgur) July 6, 2017 > However, extending the clip by just a couple of seconds gives an accurate picture of the full encounter, with Kornhauser-Duda shaking hands with Donald Trump immediately after greeting the U.S. First Lady. So Kornhauser-Duda did shake Donald Trump’s hand. She just shook Melania Trump’s hand first. Further, she did not appear to even see Donald Trump’s extended hand. As the two presidents shake hands, Kornhauser-Duda begins walking over to Melania Trump, appearing to maintain eye contact with her at all times, meaning she quite possibly didn’t catch the President’s attempted handshake in her peripheral vision. Finally, there is a certain order or choreography to the greetings, which Kornhauser-Duda appears to have been following. First, the two heads of state shake hands, while the two first ladies do the same, then the First Lady of Poland shakes hands with the President of the United States, while the First Lady of the United States shakes hands with the President of Poland. So even if Agata Kornhauser-Duda did see Donald Trump’s outstretched hand at the last moment, the fact that the two did not shake hands right then does not necessarily mean she was “snubbing” or “refusing” or even “smoothly avoiding” Trump. Instead, she may simply have been following protocol. Both Newsweek and Vanity Fair updated their articles after publication to reflect the fact that Donald Trump and Agata Kornhauser-Duda did actually shake hands. This incident mirrors similar reporting from June 2017, when Trump hosted India’s prime minister, Narendra Modi, at the White House. Newsweek reported at the time that Modi had “evaded” and “neatly sidestepped” a handshake from Trump by hugging him. In reality, Modi initiated a handshake with Trump, before warmly hugging him — a greeting for which the Prime Minister of India has become well known, and which he has bestowed on many world leaders in recent years.

MacGuill, Dan.  “Did India’s Prime Minister ‘Evade’ Donald Trump’s Handshake With a Hug?”  Snopes.com.  27 June 2017.;Porter, Tom.  “Watch India’s P.M. Modi Evade Trump’s Power Handshake With a Bear Hug.”  Newsweek.  27 June 2017.

"hillary" AND "bill" AND "clinton" AND "russia" AND "sanctions" AND "speech"

hillary-bill-clinton-russia-sanctions-speech

hillary-bill-clinton-russia-sanctions-speech

Bethania Palma

That Hillary Clinton opposed sanctions against Russia because of speaking fees her husband received from a Russian bank, and that the Clinton campaign used undue influence to kill a Bloomberg story about the incident.

On 18 July 2017, Fox News published a story reporting that former Secretary of State and Democratic presidential candidate Hillary Clinton had “sided” with Russia against a U.S. sanctions law known as the Magnitsky Act because her husband, former President Bill Clinton, received $500,000 in speaking fees in 2010 from a Russian investment bank. The story, authored by the same Fox reporter who wrote a debunked and retracted May 2017 story claiming the Clintons were behind a murder conspiracy that took the life of DNC staffer Seth Rich, relies only on innuendo and a portion of a 2015 email written by a Clinton campaign aide that was published by document-dumping site WikiLeaks. This sole piece of supposed evidence from the 21 May 2015 email was one sentence in an evening run-down of news stories in the works about then-candidate Clinton. Former communications staffer Jesse Lehrich sent the email to Clinton’s rapid response team: < With the help of the research team, we killed a Bloomberg story trying to link HRC’s opposition to the Magnitsky bill to a $500,000 speech that [Bill Clinton] gave in Moscow. > Based on the subject line of the email, “May 21st Nightly Press Traffic Summary,” it’s clear the email was a routine intra-campaign communication. It describes multiple articles reporters were working on, both positive and negative, including a Politico piece about Clinton’s campaign inspiring female donors and fundraisers and an Associated Press story “alleging that [Bill Clinton] pushed laws granting tax breaks for charitable donations to help with fundraising for his library.” We reached out to Lehrich and asked him to elaborate on the email. He told us digging up the old message was an attempt to shift focus away from the current president’s ongoing Russia scandal: < The administration’s line has devolved from “this Russia thing is a hoax” to “sure the President’s son and top two advisers met with Kremlin-linked operatives in hopes of getting dirt on Hillary – but one time her husband gave a speech in Moscow.”  It’s a ridiculous attempt to muddy the waters by an administration embroiled in scandal. The only new detail here seems to be a throwaway reference to a non-story in a nightly summary I compiled two years ago, which is only public because of the Kremlin’s hacking operation. If there was evidence of anything inappropriate, it surely would’ve been widely reported, but there’s not – and I’d imagine that’s why the piece was spiked. > We reached out to Bloomberg and were told by a representative that the organization doesn’t comment on internal editorial decisions. But Kathleen Culver, the James E. Burgess Ethics in Journalism chair at the University of Wisconsin – Madison, told us it’s not surprising that a campaign staffer doing strategic communications would claim credit for “killing” a negative story because the job involves seeking favorable, or at least balanced, press coverage. Claiming credit for “killing” a negative story doesn’t mean they actually asserted undue influence over a news organization. Further she told us, Bloomberg’s chief currency is its stature and credibility as a major news organization: < As a journalist you have to be open when someone tells you that what you think is so, is not so. If you’re not open to hearing that and thinking critically about it, you’re not doing the job you’re supposed to do. I have not studied this case in depth, but it is very common for strategic communications people to try to get their side of the story straight with journalists and it is journalists’ job to be open to what sources have to say while thinking about what the truth is. This is no less common on the left or the right, and it’s not less common in politics than any other kind of commerce. Given what I know about Bloomberg, I would be astounded if a campaign was able to shut down a story just because it wasn’t favorable to their candidate. > The Magnitsky Act was passed by Congress and signed into law by President Barack Obama in 2012, but it followed a rocky and ultimately failed attempt by the administration to “reset” relations with Russia after a longstanding adversarial relationship. It is named for Sergei Magnitsky, a lawyer and auditor who while working for American investor Bill Browder uncovered $230 million in tax fraud — and was the arrested when he reported the fraud to Russian authorities. Magnitsky died in prison in 2009 at the age of 37. Browder said he was beaten to death. Passage of the law, which spotlights corruption and human rights abuses in Russia, reportedly infuriated Russian President Vladimir Putin and was a catalyst for U.S.-Russia relations progressively souring. Natalia Veselnitskaya, a Kremlin-linked Russian lawyer, has since been crusading to overturn the law. Veselnitskaya has come front and center after the New York Times revealed on 9 July 2017 that President Trump’s eldest son met with her and several other operatives in hopes of obtaining deleterious information about Clinton during the presidential race. It is against this backdrop in mid-July 2017 that Fox News other outlets published stories attempting to link Bill Clinton’s speaking fee with Hillary Clinton’s stance on Russia. They resurrect a round of scrutiny Hillary Clinton received after announcing in April 2015 her bid for the presidency — she was, at the time, considered the front runner. At least two major news outlets, the New York Times and the Wall Street Journal, published articles in 2015 that juxtaposed Clinton’s role as Secretary of State and her husband’s paid speeches during her tenure. Both stopped short of reporting conclusive evidence that the payments influenced Clinton’s stance on the Magnitsky Act in her State Department role. On 30 December 2015, the Wall Street Journal reported that more than two dozen companies and one foreign government (Abu Dhabi) paid Bill Clinton a combined $8 million in speaking fees while they had matters before the State Department: < In several instances, State Department actions benefited those that paid Mr. Clinton. The Journal found no evidence that speaking fees were paid to the former president in exchange for any action by Mrs. Clinton, now the front-runner for the Democratic presidential nomination. Mrs. Clinton has come under fire from Republicans and some Democrats for potential conflicts of interest between her family’s work at the foundation and her duties as secretary of state between 2009 and February 2013. Her husband’s high-profile activities pose a unique challenge for Mrs. Clinton as she runs for president and he prepares to step up his role in her campaign. > The article goes on to note Bill Clinton spoke in Moscow and was paid by a bank that had officials implicated in the fraud scheme uncovered by Magnitsky: < Members of Congress wrote to Mrs. Clinton in 2010 seeking to deny visas to people who had been implicated by Russian accountant Sergei Magnitsky, who was jailed and died in prison after he uncovered evidence of a large tax-refund fraud. William Browder, a foreign investor in Russia who had hired Mr. Magnitsky, alleged that the accountant had turned up evidence that Renaissance officials, among others, participated in the fraud. The Russian government was opposed to sanctions. At the time, the Obama administration was attempting to reset relations with Russia. The State Department rebuffed the request from Congress. “We…do not support such a measure at this time,” a department official wrote to one senator. A few weeks later, Bill Clinton participated in a question-and-answer session at a Renaissance Capital investors conference. He was paid $500,000. After the appearance, Mr. Clinton received a personal thank-you call from Vladimir Putin, then the Russian prime minister, the government news agency TASS reported. Mrs. Clinton’s spokesman said she took aggressive steps on human-rights abuses in Russia and “personally acted to impose a ban on travel to the U.S. by several dozen officials believed to have been involved in Magnitsky’s death.” Sponsors of the congressional legislation said the move, coming in 2011, was a major step, but that it didn’t go far enough. > In preceding years, the Obama administration, with Clinton as Secretary of State, was actively trying to normalize relations with Russia, hoping Putin’s predecessor Dmitry Medvedev would serve as a moderating force. Part of that effort included hesitation by the administration to pass the Magnitsky Act. Although in hindsight it’s clear the effort was doomed to fail, it seemed to start optimistically (despite prescient warnings from Russian critics of Putin, like chess champion Gary Kasparov). Medvedev and Obama hammered out an arms agreement in 2010. The Russians allowed the Americans to fly through their airspace to reach Afghanistan. During this time, the Obama administration was criticized for its inaction on the Magnitsky Act — a move they feared would scuttle reset efforts. Writing for Foreign Policy in June 2012, Jamison Firestone, a co-founder of the law firm Firestone Duncan that employed Sergei Magnitsky, expressed frustration at the policy: < This is the real argument in Congress right now: not whether to repeal Jackson-Vanik, but what should replace it. Congress’s answer is the Sergei Magnitsky Rule of Law Accountability Act. It’s a simple law that says if an official uses his position to illegally arrest or harm a journalist or human rights activist, that person and his or her family will lose the privilege of traveling to the United States and keeping assets there. They will also be publicly named and shamed, and therefore they will effectively lose the ability to do business in the West. The law would act as a powerful disincentive for officials to persecute people who are fighting for a better Russia, just as Magnitsky was. However, President Barack Obama’s administration has stalled the bill and tried to water it down at every opportunity due to fears that it will upset its efforts to “reset” the U.S.-Russian relationship. Clinton’s efforts to portray the repeal of Jackson-Vanik as a simple trade issue — delinking its repeal from the passage of a new bill protecting human rights — is just the latest administration attempt to kill the Magnitsky bill. > By 2011, any specter of friendship between Russia and the U.S. had faded. Putin won the presidential election — a result that was greeted by large popular protests accusing him of rigging the result. Putin believed that Clinton, as Secretary of State, had undermined his power when she questioned the veracity of the election outcome, thus placing his leadership in peril. On 20 March 2017, former FBI director James Comey testified that Putin “hated” Clinton: < Putin hated Secretary Clinton so much that the flip side of that coin was that he had a clear preference for the person running against the person he hated so much. > We haven’t found evidence that supports the claim that Clinton’s posture on the Magnitsky Act was influenced by her husband’s speaking fee. Instead, it appears the position was one adopted by the Obama administration as a whole in a wider foreign policy effort to shift Russia relations to a friendlier footing. A single email message from a campaign staffer claiming to have “killed” a story at Bloomberg doesn’t prove the claim.

Zimmerman, Malia. “Hillary Clinton Sided With Russia on Sanctions As Bill Made $500G on Moscow Speech.”   Fox News. 18 July 2017.;Taylor, Adam. “The Failure of the U.S.-Russia Reset in 9 Photos.”   The Washington Post. 17 March 2014.;Applebaum, Anne. “This Law Might Explain Why a Russian Lawyer Wanted to Meet With Trump.”   The Washington Post. 11 July 2017.;Becker, Jo, et al. “Trump’s Son Met With Russian Lawyer After Being Promised Damaging Information on Clinton.”   The New York Times. 9 July 2017.;Grimaldi, James V., and Ballhaus, Rebecca. “Speaking Fees Meet Politics for Clintons.”   The Wall Street Journal. 30 December 2015.;Glenza, Jessica. “Hillary Clinton on Course to Win Presidential Election, Poll Says.”   The Guardian. 23 June 2015.;Firestone, Jamison. “Abandoning Sergei Magnitsky.”   Foreign Policy. 21 June 2012.;Neuman, Scott. “U.S.-Russia Nuclear Pact Is a ‘Reset’ For Old Rivals.'”   NPR. 8 April 2010.;Baker, Peter, and Barry, Ellen. “Russia and U.S. Report Breakthrough on Arms.”   The New York Times. 24 March 2010.;Lowry, Rich. “The Reset Failure.”   National Review. 10 January 2017.;Lake, Eli. “Garry Kasparov: Obama’s Russia Reset a ‘Disaster.’”   The Daily Beast. 26 October 2011.;Crowley, Michael, and Ioffe, Julia.. “Why Putin Hates Hillary.”   Politico. 25 July 2016.;Becker, Jo, and McIntire, Mike. “Cash Flowed to Clinton Foundation Amid Russian Uranium Deal.”   The New York Times. 23 April 2015.;Grant, Charles. “The US-Russia Reset Is Over.”   Centre for European Reform. 2 April 2012.

names-baseball-championship-world

names-baseball-championship-world

David Mikkelson

Baseball's championship competition is known as the "World Series" because it was originally sponsored by the New York World newspaper.

For over a century now, baseball’s annual championship, the World Series, has been an essential American ritual. The modern World Series began in 1903, when the National League’s pennant-winning Pittsburgh Pirates agreed to a best-of-nine playoff series against Boston, champions of the upstart American League (which had made the jump from minor league to major league just two years earlier). The concept of a post-season championship series evolved long before 1903, however. Teams engaged in exhibitions and unofficial regional playoffs after the end of regular-season play since the earliest days of professional baseball, and after 1882 season the National League’s first-place Chicago team played a pair of games against Cincinnati, the champions of the newly-formed American Association. These games were primarily exhibition contests (because the National League had yet to acknowledge the legitimacy of the American Association), but every year from 1884 through 1890 the two leagues’ champions met in post-season series of varying lengths (an event that was known, among other names, as the “world series”). The 1891 playoff was cancelled due to interleague squabbling, and any hopes for its resurrection were dashed when the American Association folded before the 1892 season. The National League expanded from eight teams to twelve in 1892 by absorbing four of the entries from the failed American Association, and a post-season championship was created by dividing the season into halves and pitting the winners of the two halves against each other. The split-season format proved unpopular and therefore didn’t come off in 1893, so an entrepreneur from Pittsburgh named William C. Temple promoted a new post-season scheme the next year by offering to award an ornate $800 cup to the winner of a best-of-seven series between the National League’s first- and second-place finishers. The “Temple Cup” championship series, as it became known, was held for the four years between 1894 and 1897, after which a lack of fan interest resulted in its termination and the return of the cup to its donor. Save for a brief series between the National League’s pennant-winning Brooklyn Superbas and the runner-up Pittsburgh Pirates after the 1900 season (the winner receiving a silver cup donated by the Pittsburgh Chronicle-Telegraph), post-season play did not resume until the modern World Series matching American and National league champions against each other began in 1903. Somewhere along the way (the earliest citation we’ve found so far is from 1991), people have picked up the notion that the fall classic, baseball’s World Series, is so named not because the victors are considered the world’s champions, but because the contest was originally sponsored by the New York World newspaper: < [Sutherland, 1999] Many believe that the name World Series is American hype or arrogance, but the truth is that the Series was named after the New York World newspaper who sponsored the title games in the early part of the century. [Auf Der Mar, 1991] I followed the Blue Jays through their futility and then rooted for Atlanta in the wonderful World Series (originally named, by the way, for the New York World, the newspaper that was its first sponsor). > Perhaps this belief springs from today’s hyper-commercial sporting climate, in which nearly all athletic championships and sports stadiums are named for corporate sponsors, or perhaps it springs from the incongruity of the winners of a contest featuring only teams from North America being declared “world champions,” but so prevalent is this erroneous belief that it is now regularly cited as a “fact,” despite a complete lack of any supporting evidence. The New York World was established in 1860, just before the Civil War, and it fared poorly throughout the 1870s before being bought up by Joseph Pulitzer in 1883. Over the next half-century, the World was renowned for everything from its “yellow journalism” to its debut of the crossword puzzle; in 1930 it was sold and merged with the Evening Telegram to become the New York World-Telegram. The New York World never had anything to do with the World Series, however, other than being one of the many newspapers to report the results. The modern World Series (like its predecessor series waged between National League and American Association teams from 1884-1890) was so named not because of any affiliation with a corporate sponsor, but because the winner was considered the “world’s champion” — the title was therefore simply a shortened form of the phrase “world’s championship series.” Negative evidence is easily uncovered by reading accounts of the first few World Series in the major newspapers of the era. The first several contests between the two league champions were reported under a variety of titles — “championship series,” “world championship series,” “world’s series” — before eventually becoming standardized in name as the “World Series.” If the name had derived from the New York World‘s sponsorship, it would have been known as nothing but the “World Series” from the very beginning (and as far back as 1884). The National Baseball Hall of Fame and Museum concurs, a 1999 article noting of this claim that: < [O]thers have asked that question of the staff at the Baseball Hall of Fame in Cooperstown, N.Y. in recent weeks. “There’s no evidence suggesting it was ever sponsored by the New York World newspaper,” said Hall of Fame researcher Eric Enders. When the World Series between the National and American leagues began in 1903, the owners borrowed the name from the world championship series held in the 1880s between the National League and the American Association. Enders concludes the name didn’t originate from the name of the long-defunct newspaper. It sounds like an urban myth. >

Auf Der Mar, Nick.  “World Series Fever Offers No Relief from Agony of Stadium Envy.”   The [Montreal] Gazette.  30 October 1991  (p. A2).;Dickey, Glenn.  The History of the World Series Since 1903.   New York: Stein and Day, 1984.;Seymour, Harold.  Baseball: The Early Years.   New York: Oxford University Press, 1960.  ISBN 0-19-505912-3.;Sutherland, Norman.  “Unhappy Start for Yankees.”   The [Glasgow] Herald.  20 March 1999  (p. 9).;Thorn, John et al.  Total Baseball.   Kingston, NY: Total Sports Publishing, 2000.  ISBN 1-930844-01-8  (pp. 265-280).;Minneapolis Star Tribune.  “Q & A on the News.”   29 October 1999  (p. A2).

trump-protest-no-right

trump-protest-no-right

President Trump said that Americans had no right to protest against him.

MOSTLY FALSE

On 22 April 2017, the web site Learn Progress published an article under the misleading and sensationalized title “Trump Says Americans Have “No Right” to Protest Him. TYRANNY”: < In one of his most alarming moves yet, Donald Trump just had his lawyer file a motion claiming the American people have “no right” to protest President Orange. This is a DIRECT affront to our 1st Amendment rights and Trump’s boldest tyrannical power play yet. > Although Trump has called protests against him “unfair” and has alleged without evidence that protesters were paid, he has not said that the American people have no right to protest against him. Three protesters filed a lawsuit against Donald Trump after they were ejected from a campaign rally in March 2016, arguing that Trump had incited violence against them. Lawyers representing Trump argued in a court filing that the President had acted legally as the protesters had “no right” to express a dissenting view at his rallies since it violated Trump’s right to “choose the content of his own message.” Here’s the text in question: < Of course, protestors have their own First Amendment right to express dissenting views, but they have no right to do so as part of the campaign rally of the political candidates they oppose. Indeed, forcing the “private organizers” of a political rally to accept everyone “who wish[es] to join in with some expressive demonstration of their own” would “violate[] the fundamental rule of protection under the First Amendment, that a speaker has the autonomy to choose the content of his own message.” Id. at 573. > Although Trump’s lawyers argued that the protesters had “no right” to protest at his campaign rally, the President did not say that this applied to all Americans protesting against him at other times or locations. Â

Samuelsohn, Darren.  “Lawsuit claiming Trump incited violence advances.”   Politico.  2 April 2017.;Vogel, Kenneth.  “Trump lawyer: ‘No right’ to protest at rallies.”   Politico.  20 April 2017.;Learn Progress.  “Trump Says Americans Have “No Right” to Protest Him. TYRANNY.”   22 April 2017.

ronald-reagan-fascism-liberalism

ronald-reagan-fascism-liberalism

Bethania Palma

President Ronald Reagan said, "If fascism ever comes to America, it will come in the name of liberalism."

On 21 August 2017, the conservative non-profit organization Turning Point USA (TPUSA) posted a meme juxtaposing a 42-year-old quote by former California governor Ronald Reagan with a 2016 photograph of anti-fascist protesters in Dover, England, intended to create the impression that “antifa” demonstrators represented fascism coming to the the United States in just the way that Reagan had predicted decades earlier: That quote was taken from a December 1975 interview of Reagan conducted by Mike Wallace for the 60 Minutes news magazine television program: TPUSA shared the Reagan meme on their official Facebook feed at a time when anti-fascist activists, or “antifa,” had garnered both notoriety and heightened media scrutiny following violent incidents at white supremacist rallies in Berkeley, California, and Charlottesvile, Virginia, (in April and August 2017, respectively). After white supremacists (who have adopted the moniker “alt-right”) were widely condemned for an outbreak of deadly violence at a protest in Charlottesville, some conservatives responded by claiming “antifa” protesters deserved equal condemnation. The bottom image in the TPUSA meme (which has been shared thousands of times) wasn’t taken in the United States, despite the implication created by its inclusion here. The photograph was taken in Dover, England, on 30 January 2016 by Press Association photographer Gareth Fuller and depicts anti-fascists who clashed with nationalists during an anti-immigration rally in the Kent County town. The connection between “liberals” and the “antifas” suggested by this meme isn’t quite so apt, as most “antifa” activists are anarchists and/or subscribe to political philosophies that are much further left on the political spectrum than those of mainstream “liberals.” Likewise, although the Reagan quote sought to draw a connection between liberalism and fascism, the latter is generally considered to be a form of extreme right-wing ideology.

ITV.  “Far-Right and Anti-Fascist Groups Clash at Protests in Dover.”   30 January 2016.;Penny, Daniel.  “An Intimate History of Antifa.”   The New Yorker.  22 August 2017.;Beinart, Peter.  “The Rise of the Violent Left.”   The Atlantic.  September 2017 issue.;KentOnline.com.  “Dover Riots of January 30, 2016 — Police Hunt for Far Right and Anti-Fascist Thugs Goes On.”   30 January 2017.;Sepulvado, John, and Bert Johnson.  “Californian Who Helped Lead Charlottesville Protests Used Berkeley as a Test Run.”   KQED-TV.  14 August 2017.;McCreesh, Shawn.  “Antifa and the ‘Alt-Left’: Everything You Need to Know.”   Rolling Stone.  18 August 2017.

donald-trump-father-kkk-1927

donald-trump-father-kkk-1927

Donald Trump's father was arrested following a Ku Klux Klan-related altercation in 1927.

On 9 September 2015 the BoingBoing web site published an article that referenced an archived New York Times piece from 1927, one which reported that President Donald Trump’s father, Fred Trump had been arrested in connection with a KKK event: < According to a New York Times article published in June 1927, a man with the name and address of Donald Trump’s father was arraigned after Klan members attacked cops in Queens, N.Y. In 1927, Donald Trump’s father would have been 21 years old, and not yet a well-known figure. Multiple sources report his residence at the time — and throughout his life — at the same address. To be clear, this is not proof that Trump senior — who would later go on to become a millionaire real estate developer — was a member of the Ku Klux Klan or even in attendance at the event. Despite sharing lawyers with the other men, it’s conceivable that he may have been an innocent bystander, falsely named, or otherwise the victim of mistaken identity during or following a chaotic event. A person answering calls at the N.Y.C. Police Department’s Records Section said that arrest reports dating that far back were not available in any form. > BoingBoing included a copy of the New York Times article, with the source material available behind a paywall on the New York Times‘ web-based archive. That article reported a May 1927 “free-for-all battle” involving 100 policemen and 1,000 Klansmen in Jamaica, Queens: The elder Trump’s name appeared once in the article, at the end of a portion headed “Prisoners are Arraigned.” Details about charges filed against other individuals were included, but Trump was simply said to have been “discharged” (with no further information about his overall involvement or lack thereof): On 22 September 2015, the New York Times published an interview with Donald Trump, a transcript of which was prefaced with the following: < Mr. Trump’s barrage of answers — his sudden denial of a fact he had moments before confirmed; his repeatedly noting that no charges were filed against his father in connection with the incident he had just repeatedly denied; and his denigration of the news organization that brought the incident to light as a “little website” — shows his pasta-against-the-wall approach to beating down inconvenient story lines. > That interview also included the following exchange on the subject of Fred Trump’s arrest: < Q. Have you seen this story about police arresting a Fred Trump who lived at that Devonshire address in 1927 after a Ku Klux Klan rally turned violent? A. Totally false. We lived on Wareham. The Devonshire — I know there is a road Devonshire but I don’t think my father ever lived on Devonshire. Q. The Census shows that he lived there with your mother there. But regardless, you never heard about that story? A. It never happened. And by the way, I saw that it was one little website that said it. It never happened. And they said there were no charges, no nothing. It’s unfair to mention it, to be honest, because there were no charges. They said there were charges against other people, but there were absolutely no charges, totally false … Somebody showed me that website — it was a little website and somebody did that. By the way, did you notice that there were no charges? Well, if there are no charges that means it shouldn’t be mentioned … Because my father, there were no charges against him, I don’t know about the other people involved. But there were zero charges against him. So assuming it was him — I don’t even think it was him, I never even heard about it. So it’s really not fair to mention. It never happened. > The author of the piece wrote that Trump revisited the topic “unprompted,” interjecting to say that: < And by the way, my father was not involved, was never charged and I never even heard this before. What? It comes out on a website and you are going to write it on The New York Times? It shouldn’t be written because it never happened, No. 1. And No. 2, there was nobody charged. > While it’s possible the elder Trump attended the event along with KKK supporters and Klansmen, it’s also possible he was minding his own business in his own neighborhood and got swept up by police after unknowingly finding himself in the middle of an enormous brawl.

cbo-ahca-score

cbo-ahca-score

Bethania Palma

The American Health Care Act was scored twice by the CBO and it went through four committees before the House voted on it.

MOSTLY FALSE

On 6 May 2017, a spokeswoman for House Speaker Paul Ryan tweeted that the American Health Care Act (AHCA) had been scored by the Congressional Budget Office and had been through four committees, implying this scrutiny had taken place before it was voted on by the House of Representatives largely along party lines on 4 May 2017: < While we’re setting the record straight: AHCA was posted online a month ago, went through 4 committees, & has been scored by CBO — twice. — AshLee Strong (@AshLeeStrong) May 6, 2017 > < CBO has scored #AHCA twice. #facts March 13: https://t.co/fqlMGmPVdz March 23: https://t.co/OAJ4M7lhEP — AshLee Strong (@AshLeeStrong) May 6, 2017 > The Congressional Budget Office has not yet scored the current version of the bill that was passed by the House of Representatives, according to CBO spokeswoman Deborah Kilroe, who told us in an e-mail: < CBO is currently working on the estimate, which will be published on our website as soon as it has been completed. > White House spokeswoman Sarah Huckabee Sanders confirmed during a press briefing on 4 May 2017 that the bill hadn’t yet been scored when the House voted on it, saying: < Look, I think even if they were to score it it’s impossible to score a lot of the things that would go into this because it has so many different factors that you simply can’t predict what governors may do in their states, specific conditions that patients may have. So even if it was to be scored, I think it would be impossible to predict how that might actually affect and impact. > CBO did score previous iterations of the bill on 13 March and 23 March and both times determined that if passed as-is, both versions would have resulted in increased numbers of people lacking health insurance in comparison with the current legislation, the Affordable Care Act (ACA). The bill is now headed to the Senate. Strong clarified her remarks in an e-mail, noting a CBO score will still be needed for lawmakers to move it forward: < An updated CBO score is required before the Senate can take up the reconciliation bill per the Senate rules to ensure it complies with the requisite savings. Timing of that score is a question for CBO. This isn’t the final bill or the final vote. It’s only the first step in the legislative process. > According to its web site, “CBO is required by law to produce a formal cost estimate for nearly every bill that is approved by a full committee of either the House or the Senate”: < CBO produces a number of reports specified in statute, of which the best known is the annual Budget and Economic Outlook. Other CBO reports that are required by law or have become regular products of the agency owing to sustained interest from the Congress are described in products. In addition, CBO is required by law to produce a formal cost estimate for nearly every bill that is approved by a full committee of either the House or the Senate; the only exceptions are appropriation bills, which do not receive formal written cost estimates but whose budgetary effects CBO estimates for the Appropriations Committees. CBO also produces formal cost estimates at other stages of the legislative process if requested to do so by a relevant committee or by the Congressional leadership. > The Senate seems poised to take a more cautious approach than its peers, with Sen. Lindsay Graham (R-South Carolina) tweeting that although he wants to replace the ACA, he is concerned that the House bill was hastily advanced without a CBO report and said it “should be viewed with caution,” while Sen. Roy Blunt (R-Missouri) said during a 7 May 2017 “Meet the Press” interview that the Senate would wait for a CBO score before proceeding.

White House Press Office.  “Press Gaggle by Principal Deputy Press Secretary Sarah Sanders.”   4 May 2017.;Meet the Press.   “Full Interview: Sen. Blunt on Heath Care and the Russia Investigation.”   7 May 2017.;McCaskill, Noland.  “Former CBO Director: Voting Without Score Is ‘a Terrible Mistake.'”    Politico.  4 May 2017.;Shelbourne, Mallory.  “Blunt: Senate Will Wait for CBO Score Before Healthcare Vote.”    The Hill.  7 May 2017.

supreme-court-rules-travel-ban

supreme-court-rules-travel-ban

David Mikkelson

The U.S. Supreme Court has ruled that President Trump's travel bans are "well within his constitutional rights to impose."

In early 2017 courts in the U.S. ruled against President Trump’s proposals (issued via executive order) to temporarily ban travel from six Muslim majority countries (Iran, Libya, Somalia, Sudan, Syria and Yemen), saying the plan improperly targeted religion. After a 3 June 2017 attack in London that killed seven people and left several dozen others injured, President Trump took to Twitter to call for prompt U.S. Supreme Court (SCOTUS) review of his “watered down Travel Ban”: < The Justice Dept. should ask for an expedited hearing of the watered down Travel Ban before the Supreme Court – & seek much tougher version! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) June 5, 2017 > On 5 June 2017, the America’s Last Line of Defense web site published an article positing that Supreme Court review of the travel ban had been completed, and that the nation’s highest court had upheld the ban as constitutional: < The Supreme Court just ruled 5-4 that the President’s travel bans are well within his constitutional rights to impose and because of that, America will be a much safer place. Not only did the court overturn the lower court’s decision on the ban, it also restored the order to its original glory, banning terrorists from 7 countries and allowing President Trump “all of the authority granted a President in matters of immigration.” The ruling makes significant changes to the way things are going to be done at airports. No longer will you have to be inconveniently pulled out of line at random because we have to search the same number of regular people as we do Muslims. Agents at the airport will be able to profile how they see fit. Without the influx of refugees applying for asylum at the airport, since they simply won’t be coming here. the TSA can work on rooting out the people who want to do us harm who already live here. > There was no truth to this report at the time it was published. As of June 2017, the Supreme Court had yet to rule on the ban. However, the high court did narrow the scope of previous stays on the ban in a 26 June 2017 unsigned opinion which said that the ban would be in effect for residents from those nations who lacked a “bona fide relationship with any person or entity in the United States.” The court said that foreign nationals could enter the U.S. to “live with or visit a family member.” Other exceptions to the ban would include students admitted to a U.S.-based university, lecturers heading into the country for an appearance, or someone moving to the US after accepting a job offer. The court also said that it would hear arguments regarding the issue in October. This report originated with America’s Last Line of Defense, a fake news site whose a disclaimer notes that they are a “satirical publication” created to “present fiction as fact,” and that their “sources don’t actually exist.”

Stryker.  “BREAKING: Supreme Court Rules on Travel Ban.”   America’s Last Line of Defense.  5 June 2017.;Chung, Andrew and Hurley, Lawrence. “Supreme Court Breathes New Life into Trump’s Travel Ban.” Reuters. 27 June 2017.

animal-rescue-theft-harvey

animal-rescue-theft-harvey

Anyone who rescues an animal from dangers caused by Tropical Storm Harvey can be prosecuted for theft of an animal in Texas.

With humanitarian and rescue operations underway in response to Tropical Storm Harvey in Texas, rumors are cropping up that could discourage the rescue of animals in danger. Snopes readers wrote in to ask about the following warning: < State law says until [animals are] chest deep [in water or mud], they can’t be touched by anyone other than the owner, otherwise it’s horse theft. Even law enforcement officers can’t pull them until that point. > What the law says There is no law in Texas that specifically states when an animal rescue is or is not a theft — either because of water and mud levels or any other circumstance. Stealing horses, cattle, “exotic livestock”, or ten or more sheep, goats or pigs is a third-degree felony in Texas if the total value of the animals is up to $150,000. (Sec 31.03 e 5). While there is no provision in Texas law which allows an exception specifically for rescuing an animal from a flood, it is extremely unlikely — almost unimaginable — that someone who rescued an animal from death or injury would be prosecuted for theft (unless, of course, they later refused to return the animal to its owner). For one thing, prosecutors (usually district attorneys) have limited resources and have to prioritize only the most urgent and egregious crimes. A herd of cattle or a dozen horses being removed from their owner’s possession during a devastating natural disaster of historic proportions would not fall into this category. Secondly, prosecutors generally avoid pursuing cases they are not likely to win — and they are not likely to convince a jury to convict of theft a person who acted to save an animal’s life. Moreover, such a case would probably bring the prosecutor, who is usually an elected official, negative attention. Jeremy Rosenthal, a Texas-based criminal defense attorney and former prosecutor at the Collin County District Attorney’s office, told us that, according to Texas law, prosecutors can and should refuse to prosecute cases that do not advance the cause of justice. Article 2.01 of the Texas Code of Criminal Procedure says that the “primary duty” of prosecutors is “not to convict, but o see that justice is done.” Rosenthal calls this “the common sense factor.” < A prosecutor’s job isn’t to hit somebody with the maximum that they can hit them with, it’s to see that justice is done. > However, even if a prosecutor – for whatever reason – decided to pursue an individual who had taken an animal from its owner in order to save its life, that individual would have several legal defenses available to them which would make conviction extremely unlikely.  Both Rosenthal and Marcia Kramer, a lawyer and Director of Legal and Legislative Programs for the Animal Law Resource Center at the National Anti-Vivisection Society, both told us that the first line of defense in a case like this would likely be the defense of “necessity.”  The Necessity Defense Texas Penal Code Section 9.22 offers a kind of blanket defense against criminal prosecution of many kinds, which would include theft: < Conduct is justified if: (1) the actor reasonably believes the conduct is immediately necessary to avoid imminent harm; (2) the desirability and urgency of avoiding the harm clearly outweigh, according to ordinary standards of reasonableness, the harm sought to be prevented by the law proscribing the conduct; and (3) a legislative purpose to exclude the justification claimed for the conduct does not otherwise plainly appear. > “Necessity,” Rosenthal says, “is basically where there is greater harm that results from not taking the action.” < You could make the case – very clearly – that this horse, these cattle were going to die unless I acted. > The ‘Deprivation Defense’ Both Kramer and Rosenthal also pointed out that the very definition of theft in Texas seems to exclude a good faith animal rescue. The Texas Penal Code (Sec. 31.03 a) states that “A person commits an offense if he unlawfully appropriates property with intent to deprive the owner of property.” However, “deprive” is defined as follows (Sec. 31.01 2): < (A) to withhold property from the owner permanently or for so extended a period of time that a major portion of the value or enjoyment of the property is lost to the owner; (B) to restore property only upon payment of reward or other compensation; or (C) to dispose of property in a manner that makes recovery of the property by the owner unlikely. > Kramer says: < Since the rescue is not meant to deprive the owner of the enjoyment of the value of their property (animal), but rather to preserve the value (the life) of the animal, a rescue does not qualify as a theft under Texas law. The element of “intent” is absent from animal rescue. > Rosenthal pointed out that if someone who rescued an animal later refused to return it to its owner, that could, of course, be treated as theft.Â

Texas Penal Code.  “Title 7. Offenses Against Property. Chapter 31. Theft.”  Texas Legislature.  November 2015.;Texas Penal Code.  “Title 2. General Principles of Criminal Responsibility. Chapter 9. Justification Excluding Criminal Responsibility. Subchapter A. General Provisions.”  Texas Legislature.  November 2015.;Texas Code of Criminal Procedure.  “Title 1. Code of Criminal Procedure. Chapter 2. General Duties of Officers.”   Texas Legislature.  November 2015.

4chan-user-prediction-las-vegas-shooting

4chan-user-prediction-las-vegas-shooting

Bethania Palma

An anonymous 4chan user predicted the October 2017 Las Vegas Strip mass shooting.

In early October 2017, a rumor surfaced online alleging that a person using only the name “john” on the messaging board 4chan had “predicted” the mass shooting in Las Vegas on 1 October 2017. Police say a 64-year-old gunman opened fire from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino on a crowd of 22,000 people gathered below for the Route 91 Harvest Festival at 10:05 p.m. on 1 October. The attacker had modified a semi-automatic firearm so that it fired like an automatic, and for roughly ten minutes he sprayed the concert crowd with bullets, killing 58 people and wounding hundreds. As with many mass casualty incidents in recent history, conspiracy theorists immediately pounced, claiming without proof, for example, that there was a second gunman on the fourth floor of the hotel or that internet sleuths had spotted footage of the shooter at an anti-Trump rally. In keeping with this pattern, conspiracy-minded web sites Neon Nettle and WorldTruth.tv posted identical stories claiming that an anonymous 4chan user predicted the Las Vegas Strip massacre three weeks before it occurred. NeonNettle reported: < The ominous warning was left on the anonymous message boards on the 16th anniversary of the 9/11 attacks. The user warned people to “stay away” from Las Vegas due to a coming deadly attack. The mysterious 4chan user, who went only by the name “John”, made a series of, at the time, overlooked posts. He warned other users to avoid gatherings of large groups of people in the Vegas or nearby Henderson areas. John claimed to have inside knowledge of, what he referred to as, a “high incident project” that was due to take place soon. > The messages posted by “John” on either 10 September or 11 September 2017 (depending where you look) don’t in fact predict any specific catastrophe — he only said vaguely that some kind of incident would occur the following day in Las Vegas or Henderson, and that a harbinger of this disaster will be “three black vans parked next to either.” According an alleged screen shot and archive of his comments, reposted to 4chan the day after the shooting (with the thread title, “Anon ‘jon’ predicted Vegas attack”) the anonymous user issued the warning a day before the 16th anniversary of the 11 September terrorist attack, which could point to a troll trying to drum up fear as the anniversary approached. The user wrote: < look i feel bad for some of you on this website. so i’ll let you in on a little secret. if you live in las vegas or henderson stay inside tomorrow. don’t go anywhere where there are large groups of people. also if you see three blacks vans parked next to each other immediately leave the area. you’re welcome -john […] it’s called the “high incident project”. they want to make the american public think that places with extremely high security aren’t safe. they are trying to create more regulations. you will see laws proposed within the next few years to put up more metal detectors and other security devices. media and politicians will be saying places with lots of police need even more police. i can’t guarantee anything will happen tomorrow but las vegas is on their minds. -john […] if their plan is successful state of nevada will pass a law in the future making all casinos have mandatory metal detectors and backscatter machines. soon after a federal law will be passed to put these machines in universities, high schools, federal buildings, you name it. osi systems and chertoff are the main producers of these machines. sometime around 2020 chertoff and osi will merge into a single company. after they merge the owners will sell off all their stock and make billions in profit. mr chertoff has been in contact with sheldon adelson. mr adelson will become a huge sponsor of these machines and he will be the first to put them in his casinos when the law passes. this is my last message for now. don’t expect me to return anytime soon -john > Although some 4chan users questioned whether the person who wrote the posts was the Las Vegas gunman, others didn’t seem impressed at all, saying the user had a habit of regularly posting vague predictions. As one person pointed out, “Make 1000 predictions a year and a couple will come true.” Another 4chan user noted that the name “john” may reference John Titor, a message board hoax from the early 2000s that depicted a time traveling soldier from the future who made bogus predictions about catastrophic events. We don’t know who posted these messages, nor do we know whether the person who did so posts similar messages regularly. They gave the wrong date and didn’t refer to any specifics that would point to knowledge predicting the Strip attack. The aspect of the prediction that was correct was the location, but even that was general. Predictably both Neon Nettle and WorldTruth.tv used the posts to support the claim that the attack was a “false flag” — a prevailing conspiracy theory that posits mass casualty incidents are engineered by the government to serve as pretense for heightened security and surveillance, and/or tighter gun control legislation.

Greenberg, Jay. “Las Vegas False Flag: Anonymous 4chan User Warned of Attack 3 Weeks in Advance.”   Neon-Nettle.com. 3 October 2017.;WorldTruth.tv. “Las Vegas False Flag: Anonymous 4chan User Warned of Attack 3 Weeks in Advance.”;Guynn, Jessica. “YouTube Alters Algorithm After Searches for Las Vegas Shooting Turn Up Conspiracy Theories.”   USA Today. 5 October 2017.;Levin, Sam. “Las Vegas Survivors Furious as YouTube Promotes Clips Calling Shooting a Hoax.”   The Guardian. 4 October 2017.;Ohlheiser, Abby. “How Far-Right Trolls Named the Wrong Man as the Las Vegas Shooter.”   The Washington Post. 2 October 2017.

army-green-card-enlistment

army-green-card-enlistment

The United States Army will no longer accept lawful permanent residents, also called "green card" holders, as recruits.

MOSTLY FALSE

Lawful permanent residents of the U.S. (popularly known as “green card” holders) enlisting in the Army or any other service branch will face an extended delay before entering active duty as of October 2017. U.S. Army Recruiting Command (USAREC) said in a statement on 24 October that enlistees holding a Form I-551 card (a green card) will be placed in the Army’s existing delayed entry program for recruits awaiting their boot camp assignment dates. According to USAREC, green card holders who enlist will now have to complete their background checks, which could take up to a year, before being allowed to begin boot camp. Previously they were eligible to begin their training as soon as their background check began. Stephanie Miller, director of accessions for the Department of Defense, is quoted as saying: < Effective immediately, all green card holders must complete a background investigation and receive a favorable military security suitability determination prior to entering any component of the armed forces > Enlistments by green card holders into the Army Reserve, however, are “temporarily on hold,” according to USAREC’s statement, while a separate delayed entry pool is created for those recruits to be placed in while their background checks are completed. Jennie Pasquarella, director of immigrants’ rights for the American Civil Liberties Union (ACLU) of California, told us that while the policy is not an outright ban, it would discourage enlistment on the part of green card holders. She also said that even if enlistees’ background checks took less than a year, it represented a significant delay: < When you combine that with the fact that most people are enlisting when they’re coming out of high school. They’re teenagers. A year is a very long time in the scope of a person’s life when they’re graduating from high school and trying to figure out the next step in their life. Either way, it’s going to have an enormous impact on the number of [green card holders] who are able, ultimately, to enlist in the military. > A Pentagon spokesperson, Maj. David Eastburn, told us on 26 October 2017 that the policy shift would provide better continuity of service for enlistees: < A service member would leave and sometimes these background checks take a really long time. So these guys would complete basic training and then they couldn’t go on to their tech school or their specialty school because the background check wasn’t complete. They would end up sitting there for months, or they would have to choose a different job with a lower security requirement because it wasn’t complete yet. The new policy allows the recruit to have that complete prior to entering service so when they finish they can go on to their tech school and they can progress naturally throughout their military career. There’s no speed bump, for lack of a better term. > On 13 October 2017, the Department of Defense (DOD) said that green card holders enlisted in military reserve components like the Army Reserve and National Guard would be eligible to apply for U.S. citizenship if they completed their background checks and served for one year: < For example, the individual drilled successfully, he achieved all of his points, he did his two weeks of annual training and as a result, achieved one good federal year. At that time, the department would render that person’s service as honorable, and then the department would sign the form that he would include in the naturalization packet for U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services. > Current green card holders, USAREC said, can still enlist for active duty “with the understanding that they will be part of the Delayed Entry Pool until the screening process is complete.” Before that statement, a Mic.com article reported that the Army Reserve had banned green card holders from enlisting entirely, quoting from an email sent to recruiters by Gregory C. Williamson, chief of the Accessions Suitability Office Guard Strength Division: < EFFECTIVE IMMEDIATELY DO NOT ‘SHIP’ OR ‘ENLIST’ ANY FOREIGN NATIONAL’S (ALL I-551 CARD HOLDERS) UNTIL FURTHER NOTICE. > Such a ban would have violated federal law allowing for any “alien who is lawfully admitted for permanent residence” to enlist for military service. On 18 October 2017, it published the following update: < On Wednesday, an Army public affairs officer responded to Mic’s Tuesday report, clarifying that “for the time being,” green card holders cannot enlist in the Army Reserve specifically, rather than barring enlistment in the Army overall. > According to the Immigration and Naturalization Act, active and retired U.S. service members are eligible to become naturalized citizens if they served for at least one year and, if applicable, were discharged honorably. In 2016 the Pentagon suspended the Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest program (MAVNI), which offered an expedited path to U.S. citizenship for green card holders in exchange for six years of service. Two separate lawsuits have been filed by recruits in connection with the move, and some recruits have reported that their enlistment contracts have been terminated. On 25 October 2017, the United States District Court for the District of Columbia granted a preliminary injunction to the three plaintiffs in one suit. The court determined that Mahlon Kirwa, Santhosh Meenhallimath, and Ashok Viswanathan “are suffering, and will continue to suffer, irreparable harm due to DOD’s inaction” and stated that DOD may not refuse to certify MAVNI enlistees “who have served for one day or more in the Selected Reserve as having honorable service.” Defense Secretary Jim Mattis said on 13 October 2017 that the MAVNI program may be revived: < We are taking the steps obviously to save the program, if it can be saved. And I believe it can. > We contacted U.S. Army Recruiting Command seeking further comment. A spokesperson for the U.S. Navy, Lt. Cmdr. Nick Sherrouse, told us: < All green card holders must complete a background investigation and receive a favorable military security suitability determination prior to entering any component of the armed forces. A recruiting suspension remains in effect while current personnel complete vetting requirements — no new accessions have signed enlistment contracts since June 2016. However, we will continue to process existing Military Accessions Vital to the National Interest (MAVNI) Pilot Program recruits who successfully clear all security screening requirements and are determined to be vital to the national interest. >

United States Army Recruiting Command. “DoD Issues New Guidance That Affects Recruiting Green Card Holders.”   24 October 2017.;Singer, Emily and Edwards, Ashley. “Exclusive: Army Reserve Bans Green Card Holders From Enlisting, a Move That May Break Federal Law.”   Mic. 17 October 2017.;Jordan, Miriam. “Fast Track to Citizenship Is Cut Off for Some Military Recruits.”   New York Times. 15 September 2017.;Horton, Alex. “The Pentagon tried to kill a program for immigrants. Mattis thinks it can be saved.”   Washington Post. 13 October 2017.;Garamone, Jim. “DoD Announces Policies Affecting Foreign Nationals Entering Military.”   U.S. Department of Defense. 13 October 2017.

A man in Argentina died from peritonitis after holding in gas during a visit with his girlfriend's mother.

On 3 August 2017, the satirical web site 8Shit published appeared to claim that a man in Argentina had died after holding in gas during a visit with his girlfriend’s mother. < Jorge Caradeculito went to visit his girlfriend at lunch and had lunch with her and her mother. Unfortunately, the food was not was he was used to eat. Shortly after, he got the need to start farting, but he didn’t want to have an embarrassing moment in his girlfriend’s house, so he started holding them. > The article cites a Dr. Jesus Cazares as saying that the cause of death was peritonitis, caused by “diverticula in the large intestine.” The last name of the deceased is an offensive phrase in Spanish, which can be (somewhat more politely) translated as “little ass face,” and the article bears other hallmarks of being fake: the web site describes itself as a “satire and humor site”; the man is said to have lived in Argentina, but no city is mentioned; in one instance the man is named as “Jorge,” and in another he is given the Anglicized “George.” This fake story can be traced back to a 31 July article on the Brazilian web site O Observador, which says the death took place in San Carlos, Mexico (not Argentina), and from there back to a 27 July article on the Dominican web site Informate Diario. The earliest iteration of the story that we could find was a 20 July post on MeMedios Obregon, a Mexican Facebook page that posts memes, ads for fitness supplements and smoothies, along with satirical vignettes about women getting seven days off work each month for their periods, and women being unfaithful because they didn’t play with Ken dolls as children. The original Facebook post about the man who died does not cite any sources for the anecdote, does not name an author, does not say when the death is purported to have taken place, and we could find no corroborating news reports from before 20 July 2017. Finally, MeMedios Obregon added this note to the story: < The population is asked to analyze and determine which is more important: life or having an embarrassing moment. > This further demonstrates that the fictional plight of “Jorge” is just a tall tale with a moral lesson (a man killed by his own shame in the presence of his girlfriend’s mother) rather than an accurate description of events that actually took place — in Mexico, Argentina, or anywhere else.

baby-born-holding-iud

baby-born-holding-iud

Bethania Palma

Photograph shows a newborn baby clutching an IUD in his hand.

MISCAPTIONED

On 28 April 2017, a mother proudly (and jokingly) displayed a photograph on her Facebook page showing her newborn baby clutching a Mirena-brand intrauterine birth control device (IUD) in his tiny hand, along with a caption that read, “Mirena fail!” However, the baby’s mother, Lucy Hellein, never said her child was born holding the IUD in his hand. Rather, she told First Coast News that doctors had known the IUD had remained in her uterus throughout her pregnancy but were unable to locate it. After it was found and removed during her c-section, it was “placed in the hand on her son as a sort of tongue-in-cheek nod to conceiving while having an IUD in” while a friend snapped the now-viral “cheeky photograph.” Dr. Leena Nathan, an OBGYN and assistant clinical professor for the University of California at Los Angeles told us IUDs are a highly effective birth control method. Although it’s rare, doctors occasionally find failed ones in the uterus after a child is delivered. She said it would be impossible, however, for a newborn to be delivered holding such a device because there would be no way for the IUD to get inside the amniotic sac, a fluid-filled membrane that envelops a fetus while it grows inside the womb. Mirena, maker of the IUD, says on their web site that the device is over 99 percent effective at preventing pregnancy.

Dionne, Brittany and Destiny Johnson.  “VERIFY: Was This Baby Born with an IUD in His Hand?”   First Coast News.  3 May 2017.;Warner, Jennifer.  “IUD Beats Pill at Preventing Pregnancy.”   WebMD. 23 May 2012.;Diebelius, Georgia.  “Baby Poses with Implant That Was Supposed to Stop His Mum Getting Pregnant.”   Metro.  3 May 2017.

moscow-mule-copper-poisoning

moscow-mule-copper-poisoning

Drinking cocktails from a copper mug can cause copper poisoning

In August 2017, several news outlets reported that public health authorities in the state of Iowa had advised against serving certain alcoholic drinks in copper mugs: < An advisory bulletin from Iowa’s Alcoholic Beverages Division notes that, in keeping with Food and Drug Administration guidelines, copper should not come into contact with acidic foods with a pH below 6. That includes vinegar, fruit juice, wine and, yes, a traditional Moscow mule, whose pH is “well below 6.0.” the bulletin says. > Iowa’s Alcoholic Beverages Division did indeed publish an advisory bulletin on 28 July 2017: < The recent popularity of Moscow Mules, an alcoholic cocktail typically served in a copper mug, has led to inquiries regarding the safe use of copper mugs and this beverage. The use of copper and copper alloys as a food contact surface is limited in Iowa. > The bulletin goes on to explain that the Food and Drug Administration food code prohibits food or drink with pH levels of below 6 (that is, relatively acidic food and drinks) coming in contact with copper at a licensed premises like a bar or restaurant. The reasoning behind this, according to page 485 of the FDA food code, is that there is a slight but definite risk of poisoning: < High concentrations of copper are poisonous and have caused foodborne illness. When copper and copper alloy surfaces contact acidic foods, copper may be leached into the food. > The FDA code adds that anyone serving beverages (including water) through pipes must also have adequate mechanisms in place to prevent copper from leaching into drinks. It also points out that while copper is an important part of the fermentation required to brew beer, too much copper (above 0.2 mg per liter) kills yeast, so the level of copper leached into successfully-brewed beer falls below what is toxic to humans (about 3.5 mg per liter and above). The 28 July 2017 statement by the Iowa Alcoholic Beverages Division does not contain new information, new research, or a new warning about drinking from copper mugs. It is effectively a reminder, in light of the recent popularity of the  Moscow mule, that Iowa has incorporated the federal regulations contained in the FDA food code. That code has contained the same restrictions on copper plumbing and containers, and the same rationale, since at least 1997. It’s clear that although copper is an important naturally occurring trace element, it can also be toxic to humans. It is also clear that toxic levels of copper can leach into food and water through both copper containers (such as those used for acidic drinks like the Moscow mule and other beverages) and through copper or copper alloy plumbing. However, what’s less clear is how much copper is enough to make you sick, and how likely it is that you’ll be harmed by drinking a cocktail from a copper mug. In 1991, the Environmental Protection Agency established a “maximum contaminant level goal” for copper of 1.3 mg per liter of fluid (page 130). According to the EPA, the MCLG is “the maximum level of a contaminant in drinking water at which no known or anticipated adverse effect on the health of persons would occur, allowing an adequate margin of safety”. A 1999 study in the journal Environmental Health Perspectives concluded that copper levels above 3 mg per liter of drinking water were associated with increased instances of nausea, vomiting and abdominal pain. The National Research Council also lists several case reports and studies of outbreaks and incidences of copper poisoning. The details of these cases are not entirely reliable since they are not controlled experiments, and outcomes could have be affected by many variables. We asked the FDA for more details on (roughly) how many acidic cocktails an individual would have to consume, and how long the drink would have to remain in a copper container, before they became ill. The FDA forwarded our query to the Centers for Disease Control, whose spokesperson indicated it would be difficult to give a definitive answer: < We do not have any specific information regarding how many Moscow mule drinks one would need to drink out of a copper mug to have a health risk. Generally, acidic drinks would leach copper out of the unlined copper mugs. The amount of copper would depend on the acidity of the drink and the length of time that it is in contact with the mug. > We also consulted Professor Marc Solioz, a leading microbiologist who has expertise in copper toxicity; he told us that there is something of a biological early warning system that can often stop people from consuming copper-contaminated drinks: < Long before you reach the highest levels [of copper in a beverage], the drink gets a metallic taste, so this is really a warning that there’s too much copper in the drink. > Solioz was skeptical about the potential risk of poisoning and adverse symptoms (discomfort, nausea, vomiting) from the typical consumption of even acidic beverages like the Moscow mule from a copper container: < It is clear that in these mugs there will be copper dissolved by the drinks. Most drinks are acidic, and acidic solutions dissolve copper. How much copper this is is very difficult to say. It depends on the acidity, it depends on the volume that’s in there, how long it sits in there, whether it’s stirred or not. But I would think that if you just drink a drink in…  let’s say fifteen, twenty minutes, it’s probably okay. > We asked Solioz whether the risk of illness would also be low for a person drinking three to five acidic cocktails from the same copper mug over the course of several hours. He replied: < Generally low risk, yes. I personally wouldn’t be worried about it. > Solioz emphasized that while the risk from typical consumption is probably low for most people, a small proportion of the population (around 1 in 30,000 people) have Wilson disease, which causes an accumulation of copper within the body, and could potentially be harmed by consuming acidic beverages from a copper container. While most people are able to effectively secrete copper, Solioz said, those with Wilson disease struggle to do this, so even the relatively low level of copper leached into a drink could make them sick. Solioz told us he was unaware of any research which specifically measured the rate of copper leaching in containers carrying beverages of various acidities, and over various time periods. We were also unable to find such research. The closest thing to this that we could find was a short 1957 report published in the American Journal of Public Health. This report described an outbreak of nausea, vomiting and diarrhea among nurses at a military hospital in 1954. The nurses consumed cocktails at a party that had been sitting in copper-contaminated cocktail shakers for more than two hours before many of them became sick.  Dr John Wylie, the report’s author, wrote: < The evidence was suggestive of the original inner plating having become worn off through frequent use and cleaning during several years… > The cocktail was reconstructed, yielding the equivalent of 179 mg of copper per liter. Wylie concluded: < These amounts of copper are believed to have given rise to the symptoms of chemical food poisoning precipitated by the ingestion of alcohol on an empty stomach. > It’s very difficult to conclude anything from this about the rate at which cocktails might typically become contaminated in copper containers: this was a short and decades-old case report, not a scientific study (which could have controlled for various possible causal factors); the author does not make it clear whether he himself was present for the incident; and Wylie also suggests that the level of copper leaching in the cocktail was linked to significant damage to the container. Despite these serious shortcomings, the 1957 report formed the basis of the EPA’s 1991 decision that the “maximum contaminant level goal” for copper in drinking water should be 1.3 mg per liter. This recommendation remains in place in August 2017. We also asked Iowa’s Department of Inspections and Appeals for statistics on reports of copper poisoning in the state, in order to see whether there had been a spike in symptoms accompanying the increased popularity of the Moscow mule, but we were told that the state’s Department of Public Health does not track such reports. Iowa’s Alcoholic Beverages Division, meanwhile, recommends that if bar and restaurant owners are going to use copper mugs for highly-acidic drinks like the Moscow mule, they should use copper mugs lined on the inside with other metals like nickel or stainless steel.

Wang, Amy B.  “Heads up, Moscow Mule Lovers: That Copper Mug Could be Poisoning You.”  Washington Post.  8 August 2017.;CBS News.  “Copper Cocktail Mugs May Cause Food Poisoning, Food Officials Say.”  CBSNews.com.  8 August 2017.;Alcoholic Beverages Division, State of Iowa.  “Use of Copper Mugs in the Serving of Alcoholic Beverages.”  ABD.Iowa.gov.  28 July 2017.;Food and Drug Administration.  “Food Code 2013.”  FDA.gov.  2013.;Committee on Copper in Drinking Water.  “Copper in Drinking Water.”  National Research Council.  2000.;Pizarro, Fernando; Olivares, Manuel; Uauy, Ricardo; Contreras, Patricia; Rebelo, Adriana; Gidi, Virginia.  “Acute Gastrointestinal Effects of Graded Levels of Copper in Drinking Water.”  Environmental Health Perspectives.  Vol. 107, No. 2, February 1999.;Wyllie, John.  “Copper Poisoning at a Cocktail Party.”  American Journal of Public Health.  Vol. 47 Page 617, May 1957.

sandy-hook-staged

sandy-hook-staged

David Mikkelson

A video documents that the shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary School were a staged hoax.

A video widely circulated after the 14 December 2012 shootings at Sandy Hook Elementary in Newtown, Connecticut, which left 26 victims dead at that school, purported to show many contradictions in facts surrounding the Sandy Hook shootings which established that the incident was a staged “hoax”: The information presented in that video was a mixture of misinformation, innuendo, and subjective interpretation, such as the following:

Almasy, Steve.  “Newtown Shooter’s Guns: What We Know.”   CNN.  19 December 2012.;Altimari, Dave et al.  “‘The Worst I Have Seen:’ Medical Examiner Says of Sandy Hook Victims.”   Hartford Courant.  15 December 2012.;Amato, Anne M.  “Police: No Newtown Conspiracy.”   Connecticut Post.  3 January 2013.;Bennett, Dashiell.  “Newtown Conspiracy Theories, Debunked.”   The Atlantic.  18 December 2012.;Clarke, John.  “‘Petrified’ Sandy Hook Nurse Hid in Closet for Four Hours.”   Daily Mail.  17 December 2012.;Dixon, Ken.  “Medical Examiner: ‘The Worst I’ve Ever Seen.’”   Connecticut Post.  15 December 2012.;Ensor, Josie and Raf Sanchez.  “Connecticut School Shooting: Dec 15 As It Happened.”   The Telegraph.  15 December 2012.;Gorosko, Andrew.  “Police Union Seeks Funding for Trauma Treatment.”   The Newtown Bee.  27 December 2012.;Llanos, Miguel.  “Authorities ID Gunman Who Killed 27 in Elementary School Massacre.”   MSNBC.  14 December 2012.;Nahorniak, Mary.  “Victims’ Families Share Photos of Obama’s Newtown Visit.”   USA Today.  17 December 2012.;Perrefort, Dirk.  “Sandy Hook Children Ran to Neighbor’s.”   The Danbury News-Times.  21 December 2012.;Salazar, Adan.  “FBI Says No One Killed at Sandy Hook.”   InfoWars.  24 September 2014.;Seitz-Wald, Alex.  “Your Comprehensive Answer to Every Sandy Hook Conspiracy Theory.”   Salon.  18 January 2013.;Serrano, Richard.  “Gunman Kills 20 Kids, 6 Adults at Connecticut Elementary School.”   Los Angeles Times.  14 December 2012.;Spaeth, Ryu.  “The Disturbing Rise of Sandy Hook Conspiracy Theories.”   The Week.  18 Janaury 2013.;Zennie, Michael.  “Sandy Hook Hero Who Sheltered Six Children After School Massacre.”   Daily Mail.  15 January 2013.;WVIT-TV.  “Sandy Hook Gunman Had 4 Guns: State Police.”   23 January 2013.

kennedy-trump-greatest-president

kennedy-trump-greatest-president

Robert F. Kennedy Jr. said that “Trump could be the greatest president in history.”

On 14 December 2016, President John F. Kennedy’s nephew, Robert F. Kennedy Jr, appeared on CNN Tonight with Don Lemon to discuss the appointment of former ExxonMobil CEO Rex Tillerson as Secretary of State (a move Kennedy, an environmental activist, was strongly opposed to). In an earlier segment on that night’s show, Lemon and his guests had drawn comparisons between the Trumps and the Kennedys, referencing remarks made by former Microsoft head Bill Gates a day earlier, with Lemon’s asking Kennedy Jr. how he felt about this comparison: < We’ve discussed this on this show during the primary season, but Bill Gates has said today that Trump could be a new JFK. Some people look how close the Trump family is and how connected the children are to the family business and any they could be like the Kennedys. […] How do you feel about that? > Kennedy’s answer, essentially, was not that Donald Trump had already done and achieved things that would fairly rank him as the “greatest President in history,” but that the comparison of Trump to the Kennedy family could turn out to be fair, because Donald Trump “is less bound by ideology than any president probably that we’ve had this century.” His statement was one of optimism for the future and was not rooted in anything Donald Trump (who had yet to assume office) had actually done as President: < I think Trump, you know, because he doesn’t have obligations, he doesn’t owe anything to anybody, if he’s — I think if he cares about history and he understands that history is his principal audience, that he could be an extraordinary president. […] He said to Leonardo DiCaprio the other day that he wanted to be the next Teddy Roosevelt and he can easily do that he could — but I think it’s important to start by surrounding yourself with advisers who share that idealism and not people who are just working for the oil industry. I think he can be any kind of president he wants. I think he could be the greatest president in history if he wanted to. > Since that exchange, numerous pro-Trump websites have run with Kennedy’s statement that “I think [Trump] could be the greatest president in history” without offering the any of the context that led to up to it. Numerous YouTube videos excerpt this brief segment, posted under the title “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Drops Bombshell: ‘Trump Could Be Greatest President In History!'” Other sites have added their own slanted commentary to Kennedy’s remark, frequently suggesting the conversation happened more recently. In a May 2017 post frequently reshared on Facebook, ConservativeFighters.com gleefully and rhetorically asked: “Can you hear the sobs coming from liberal protesters when a left-wing icon like Robert F. Kennedy Jr. finally admits the truth?” While Kennedy is certainly a Democrat, he has expressed willingness to work with Trump in the past, especially during the timeframe when the Don Lemon interview took place. Trump allegedly offered Kennedy (though Trump later disputed this) the chance to head a controversial commission on “vaccine safety” that had been widely panned by the medical community back in January 2017. However, because Kennedy’s words, in full context, were not offered as complimentary of Trump’s actions as a president (which he wasn’t at that point) but as a general hopefulness for the future, we rate this claim as a mixture.

Lemon, Don.  “CNN Tonight with Don Lemon”   14 December 2016.;Belvedere, Matthew J.  “Bill Gates Says Trump Has the Opportunity to Be Like JFK.”   CNBC.  13 December 2016.;Conservative Fighters.  “Robert F. Kennedy Jr. Drops Bombshell: ‘Trump Could Be Greatest President in History!’   15 May 2017

russian-sleep-experiment

russian-sleep-experiment

David Mikkelson

Account describes the horrific results of a "Russian Sleep Experiment" from the late 1940s.

A popular creepy online tale of a “Russian Sleep Experiment” (with the improbable title tag of “Orange Soda”) involves Soviet researchers who kept five people awake for fifteen consecutive days through the use of an “experimental gas based stimulant” and opens as follows: < Russian researchers in the late 1940’s kept five people awake for fifteen days using an experimental gas based stimulant. They were kept in a sealed environment to carefully monitor their oxygen intake so the gas didn’t kill them, since it was toxic in high concentrations. This was before closed circuit cameras so they had only microphones and 5 inch thick glass porthole sized windows into the chamber to monitor them. The chamber was stocked with books, cots to sleep on but no bedding, running water and toilet, and enough dried food to last all five for over a month. [Remainder of article here.] > This account isn’t a historical record of a genuine 1940s sleep deprivation research project gone awry, however. It’s merely a bit of supernatural fiction that gained widespread currency on the Internet after appearing on Creepypasta (a site for “short stories designed to unnerve and shock the reader”) in August 2010.

nfl-sideline-anthem

nfl-sideline-anthem

NFL players did not stand for the national anthem until the Defense Dept. started paying the league to stage patriotic displays in 2009.

An image widely circulated on Facebook in response to the National Football League’s anthem controversy held that NFL players did not stand on the sidelines during the playing of the U.S. national anthem before games prior to 2009. Instead, they stayed in locker rooms during the anthem and did not begin standing along the sidelines for renditions of “The Star-Spangled Banner” until after the Defense Department began paying the NFL to hold patriotic displays in 2009: The issue has been in the public spotlight ever since San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick began protesting police brutality by kneeling during the playing of the national anthem during exhibition games played prior to the start of the 2016 NFL season. Several other players, including some in other sports, have since taken part in similar silent demonstrations during the 2016 and 2017 seasons. Tom E. Curran of Comcast Sportsnet New England reported in a story published on 29 August 2016 that teams standing together on the field during the playing of the national anthem was a relatively recent development in NFL history: “NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy confirmed this the practice began in 2009, adding, ‘As you know, the NFL has a long tradition of patriotism. Players are encouraged but not required to stand for the anthem.'” What actually changed in 2009, according to NFL spokesman Brian McCarthy, was that (due to network timing issues) players had previously remained in their locker rooms during the playing of the national anthem for primetime games. After 2009, players appeared in the sidelines for the anthem during primetime games, just as they had been doing all along for Sunday afternoon games. (The distinction often went unnoticed by viewers, as network telecasts frequently didn’t air the pre-game anthem ceremonies.) ESPN commentator Stephen A. Smith referenced Currant’s report during a segment on 14 September 2016, adding a “paid patriotism” element to the mix: < The players were moved to the field during the national anthem because it was seen as a marketing strategy to make the athletes look more patriotic. The United States Department of Defense paid the National Football League $5.4 million between 2011 and 2014, and the National Guard [paid] $6.7 million between 2013 and 2015 to stage on-field patriotic ceremonies as part of military recruitment budget-line items. > The practice of “paid patriotism” came to light on 30 April 2015, when Sen. Jeff Flake (R-AZ) released a statement chiding the New Jersey Army National Guard for paying between $97,000 and $115,000 to the New York Jets for a series of promotions involving military personnel. That November, Flake and fellow Arizona Republican Sen. John McCain issued a report stating that the Defense Department had been paying for patriotic displays in football and other sports between 2011 and 2014: < Contrary to the public statements made by DOD and the NFL, the majority of the contracts — 72 of the 122 contracts we analyzed — clearly show that DOD paid for patriotic tributes at professional football, baseball, basketball, hockey, and soccer games. These paid tributes included on-field color guard, enlistment and reenlistment ceremonies, performances of the national anthem, full-field flag details, ceremonial first pitches͕ and puck drops. The National Guard paid teams for the “opportunity” to sponsor military appreciation nights and to recognize its birthday. It paid the Buffalo Bills to sponsor its Salute to the Service game. DOD even paid teams for the “opportunity” to perform surprise welcome home promotions for troops returning from deployments and to recognize wounded warriors. While well intentioned, we wonder just how many of these displays included a disclaimer that these events were in fact sponsored by the DOD at taxpayer expense. Even with that disclosure, it is hard to understand how a team accepting taxpayer funds to sponsor a military appreciation game, or to recognize wounded warriors or returning troops, can be construed as anything other than paid patriotism. > However, this report did not cover the year 2009, so it is unclear whether NFL teams’ appearing on the field for the playing of the national anthem truly began in conjunction with the “paid patriotism” policy. In a September 2017 piece about the anthem controversy, CNN noted that: < [T]he connection between “paid patriotism” and players being mandated to be present for the anthem is tenuous. The report does mention several instances where teams were paid for anthem performances, but that was about the specific artist or presentation. There is nothing in the report to suggest teams were paid or coerced into pulling players on to the field as part of “paid patriotism” initiatives. In fact, Pentagon spokesman Army Major Dave Eastburn recently clarified the Defense Department’s current relationship with professional sports. “DoD does not require or request that athletes be on the field during the playing of the national anthem when military members are part of the patriotic opener,” he said in a statement to CNN. > The league announced in May 2016 that they would refund $723,724 to taxpayers which they said “may have been mistakenly applied to appreciation activities rather than recruitment efforts” during the years in question.

Willingham, A.J.  “The National Anthem in Sports (Spoiler: It Wasn’t Always This Way).”   CNN.  25 September 2017.;Jacobson, Louis.  “A Short History of the National Anthem, Protests and the NFL.”   PolitiFact.  25 September 2017.

pigeon-salute-vladimir-putin

pigeon-salute-vladimir-putin

A video shows a pigeon 'saluting' Russian President Vladimir Putin.

A video purportedly showing a pigeon raising its wing as if it were “saluting” Russian President Vladimir Putin spread on social media on 1 June 2017: In fact, Ruptly TV, RT’s Berlin-based video news agency, posted the original footage YouTube TV along with a message explaining how the pigeon had given Putin the cold shoulder: < Russian President Vladimir Putin was ignored by a humble pigeon, while walking in the grounds of the Rogozhskaya Zastava Spiritual Centre, Moscow, on Wednesday. As the president greeted the little bird, it simply wandered away from his waving hand. > The original video simply shows Vladimir Putin and pigeon passing each other on the streets of Moscow:

hillary-clinton-robert-mueller-uranium

hillary-clinton-robert-mueller-uranium

Then-Secretary of State Clinton ordered then-FBI Director Robert Mueller to deliver highly enriched uranium to the Russians in a secret plane-side meeting in 2009.

In May and June 2017, a number of hyperpartisan news and opinion web sites published articles reporting that former Federal Bureau of Investigation director Robert Mueller, who in mid-May was named special counsel in the Justice Department’s investigation into alleged ties between the Trump presidential campaign and Russian officials, was himself enmeshed in “secret dealings” with Russia related to his 2009 delivery of a sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) to Moscow ordered by Hillary Clinton. The conspiracy web site Intellihub noted that the transfer was revealed in a WikiLeaks release of a classified State Department cable: < Former Secretary of State Hillary Clinton facilitated the transfer a highly enriched uranium (HEU) previously confiscated by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) during a 2006 “nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices,” a newly leaked classified cable shows. So-called “background” information was provided in the cable which gave vague details on a 2006 nuclear smuggling sting operation in which the U.S. government took possession of some HEU previously owned by the Russians. The secret “action request,” dated Aug. 17, 2009, was sent out by Secretary of State Clinton and was addressed to the United States Ambassador to Georgia Embassy Tbilisi, the Russian Embassy, and Ambassador John Beyrle. It proposed that FBI Director Robert Mueller be the one that personally conduct the transfer a 10-gram sample of HEU to Russian law enforcement sources during a secret “plane-side” meeting on a “tarmac” in the early fall of 2009. > The WikiLeaks release was announced via Twitter on 18 May, the day after Mueller was appointed special counsel: < WikiLeaks cable Robert Mueller delivering highly enriched stolen Uranium to Russia in 2009 https://t.co/X3Ea2m6kS5 h/t @apblake pic.twitter.com/yhC91B2IBK — WikiLeaks (@wikileaks) May 18, 2017 > Intellihub characterized the plane-side transfer of uranium “shocking” and “rather reminisce [sic] of the infamous [then-Attorney General] Loretta Lynch/Bill Clinton meeting which occurred on a Phoenix, Arizona, tarmac back in June of 2016” (which meeting was cited by former FBI Director James Comey as the reason he concluded the Department of Justice wasn’t capable of an independent investigation into Hillary Clinton’s e-mail issues at the State Department). Read in its entirety, however, the cable itself reveals nothing questionable or nefarious about the transfer of evidence between Mueller and a similarly placed Russian law enforcement official in Moscow. It merely asked the U.S. Embassy in Moscow to inform the Russian government that the transfer, which was postponed from an earlier date, would take place on 21 September 2009. Moreover, it provided a complete explanation of why the transfer was taking place: < 2. (S/NF) Background: Over two years ago Russia requested a ten-gram sample of highly enriched uranium (HEU) seized in early 2006 in Georgia during a nuclear smuggling sting operation involving one Russian national and several Georgian accomplices. The seized HEU was transferred to U.S. custody and is being held at a secure DOE facility. In response to the Russian request, the Georgian Government authorized the United States to share a sample of the material with the Russians for forensic analysis. Director Mueller previously planned to deliver the sample in April (Ref A), but due to a scheduling conflict the trip was canceled. Embassy Moscow LegAtt informed the FSB prior to Mueller’s intended April delivery and received confirmation that the FSB would take custody of the sample after the Director’s plane landed. EST Moscow also informed Rosatom of the planned transfer and that the U.S. placed a high priority on completing this transfer (Ref B). Once the LegAtt told FSB counterparts the April trip had been canceled, Ambassador Beyrle informed Igor Neverov (Ref C), who said that he understood but was disappointed the trip was postponed. The September 21 visit provides again an opportunity to deliver the requested ten-gram sample from the seized HEU in order to obtain cooperation from the GOR on this nuclear smuggling case and to eventually establish a more productive mechanism of U.S.-Russian cooperation on nuclear forensics. > The 2006 sting operation was widely reported after the fact by U.S. newspapers, including the Washington Post: < Republic of Georgia authorities, aided by the CIA, set up a sting operation last summer that led to the arrest of Russian man who tried to sell a small amount of nuclear-bomb grade uranium in a plastic bag in his jacket pocket, U.S. and Georgian officials said. The operation, which neither government has publicized, represents one of the most serious cases of smuggling of nuclear material in recent years, according to analysts and officials. > Despite partisan attempts to make it appear conspiratorial, the transfer of the sample of confiscated uranium was simply an instance of cooperative law enforcement between three countries: the U.S., Georgia, and Russia. The Russia government requested a sample of the uranium for forensic testing, the Georgian government signed off on it, and the U.S. government carried out the delivery. The total amount of HEU confiscated in the sting was 3.5 ounces (about 100 grams). The amount Mueller delivered to the Russians was ten grams (the weight of four U.S. pennies).

Ambellas, Shepard.  “Hillary Clinton Requested FBI Dir. Mueller Deliver Highly Enriched Uranium to the Russians in 2009 in Secret ‘Plane-Side Tarmac Meeting.'”   Intellihub.  19 June 2017.;Butler, Desmond.  “Georgian Sting Seizes Bomb Grade Uranium.”   Associated Press.  24 January 2007.;Cohen, Zachary.  “Comey Cites Lynch-Clinton Meeting for Lost Faith in Justice Investigation.”   CNN.  3 May 2017.;The Last Great Stand.  “Hillary Told FBI’s Mueller to Deliver Uranium to Russians in 2009 ‘Secret Tarmac Meeting.'”   20 June 2017.

secret-service-broke-trump

secret-service-broke-trump

As of August 2017, the Secret Service had run out of money for the year due to the demands of protecting President Trump and his family.

MOSTLY FALSE

On 21 August 2017, several news web sites reported that the United States Secret Service had gone “broke” from paying wages and overtime to agents required to protect President Donald Trump and his family members. The New York Post‘s article carried the headline “The Secret Service has gone broke protecting Trump,” New York Magazine went with”The Trumps’ Travels Have Broken the Secret Service Budget” and The Root asserted “The Secret Service is Going Broke Protecting Y’all’s Baller in Chief.” All of these reports cited a USA Today article from earlier in the day, which said: < The Secret Service can no longer pay hundreds of agents it needs to carry out an expanded protective mission – in large part due to the sheer size of President Trump’s family and efforts necessary to secure their multiple residences up and down the East Coast. Secret Service Director Randolph “Tex” Alles, in an interview with USA TODAY, said more than 1,000 agents have already hit the federally mandated caps for salary and overtime allowances that were meant to last the entire year. > In response to our detailed questions about the issue, we received the following statement on behalf of Director Randolph Alles: < The Secret Service has the funding it needs to meet all current mission requirements for the remainder of the fiscal year and compensate employees for overtime within statutory pay caps. The Secret Service estimates that roughly 1,100 employees will work overtime hours in excess of statutory pay caps during calendar year 2017. Our agency experienced a similar situation in calendar year 2016 that resulted in legislation that allowed Secret Service employees to exceed statutory caps on pay. To remedy this ongoing and serious problem, the agency has worked closely with the Department of Homeland Security, the Administration, and the Congress over the past several months to find a legislative solution. As we work to ensure that employees are compensated for the hours they work, the Secret Service continues its rigorous hiring of special agents, Uniformed Division officers, and critical support staff to meet future mission requirements … This issue is not one that can be attributed to the current Administration’s protection requirements alone, but rather has been an ongoing issue for nearly a decade due to an overall increase in operational tempo. > So the Secret Service is not “broke”: the agency has the capacity to pay all its employees their basic salary, and to pay most of its employees whatever overtime wages are required. It also has the capacity to hire and pay additional staff. What is true is that Secret Service Director Randolph Alles predicts that by the end of 2017, some 1,100 employees will have worked at least some overtime hours above the current federal pay cap. According to an agency spokesperson, the Secret Service currently has around 6,700 employees, roughly 3,300 of whom are special agents. The current biweekly pay cap is based on compensation of $161,900 per year for special agents and uniformed division officers. This means that the combined basic salary and overtime paid to Secret Service staff on a biweekly basis cannot exceed the equivalent of $161,900 a year. (If the head of the Secret Service deems certain service to be “mission critical,” the overtime cap can apply to what an individual earns in a year, rather than every two weeks, according to the federal Office of Personnel Management.) There are a few different ways to address the problem: the Secret Service could hire enough employees so that the overall workload would be more widely distributed and require less overtime; Congress could pass legislation raising the overtime cap (meaning the agency could pay for more overtime hours worked, both retroactively and proactively); or Secret Service staff could work whatever overtime was required without being paid for some of it. The last option is obviously a troubling possibility and makes the current predicament of the Secret Service quite serious. The Committee for a Responsible Federal Budget – a nonpartisan think tank focused on fiscal and budgetary policy – gave its assessment in a statement reading: < The Secret Service is not out of money. But they are in danger of running up against pay caps that restrict how much overtime can be paid to any individual employee, just as they did during the 2016 campaign.  One short-term solution would be to repeat what they did in 2016 and waive the overtime caps, but short-term waivers are not a long-term strategy. > Between 2011 and 2015, staffing levels at the Secret Service fell by 10%, from 7,024 to 6,315, according to a House Oversight Committee report (page 118). The number of special agents fell by 8%, from 3,535 to 3,257. In 2016, with these declining staff numbers, the agency covered a presidential election campaign and two major international events (Pope Francis’s visit to the United States and a United Nations General Assembly meeting, both of which occurred in September 2016). In light of these challenges, Congress passed emergency legislation to retroactively increase the 2016 pay cap from $160,300 in basic and overtime pay per year to $185,100 for agents who worked on the presidential election. According to Rep. Jason Chaffetz, who was Chairperson of the House Oversight Committee at the time, the bill provided special agents an average of $20,427 each in overtime backpay. The Secret Service appears to be pursuing a similar legislative fix in 2017, while it attempts to hire more agents and more widely distribute its workload. In the statement the Secret Service sent us, Alles said this state of affairs cannot solely be attributed to the protection of President Trump and his family members, although his quotes as reproduced in the USA Today article do seem to indicate that the size of the President’s family has played a role in maxing out overtime pay. However, that article did not present a breakdown of the costs involved in, or the proportion of overtime hours attributable to, protecting the President and his family. We asked the Secret Service for details on the cost of various trips made by Donald Trump and his family, the cost of protection for Melania and Barron Trump when they stayed at Trump Tower in New York City, and for confirmation of whether the number of individuals under Secret Service protection is, indeed, “unprecedented” (as USA Today reported that Alles had told the paper). Unfortunately, we did not receive a direct response to any of these questions.Â

Johnson, Kevin.  “Exclusive: Secret Service Depletes Funds to Pay Agents Because of Trump’s Frequent Travel, Large Family.”  USA Today.  21 August 2017.;Chaffetz, Jason E. and Elijah E. Cummings.  “Report – Overtime Pay for Secret Service Agents Act of 2016.”  House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.  December 2016.;Chaffetz, Rep. Jason E; Cummings, Rep. Elijah E.  “United States Secret Service – an Agency in Crisis.”  House of Representatives Committee on Oversight and Government Reform.  9 December 2015.

"osteens" AND "megachurch" AND "affected"
"osteen" AND "church" AND "lakewood" AND "houston" AND "harvey"

is-osteens-megachurch-affected

is-osteens-megachurch-affected

Joel Osteen's Lakewood Church in Houston is "inaccessible" because of flooding caused by Hurricane Harvey.

In August 2017, just after Hurricane Harvey made landfall and inundated Houston with record rainfall and flooding, celebrity pastor Joel Osteen’s Lakewood Church, which is based in the region, drew criticism for not making itself available to people affected by the storm. On 27 August, the church posted: < Dear Houstonians! Lakewood Church is inaccessible due to severe flooding! We want to help make sure you are safe. Please see the list below for safe shelters around our city, and please share this with those in need! > A day later, a post on Lakewood’s blog read, in part: < Over the last couple of days, as the enormity of this storm was being realized, we have been working to organize relief efforts for the Houston area with our friend Franklin Graham and the disaster relief organization that he oversees, Samaritan’s Purse. Samaritan’s Purse has been, since it’s inception, organized to respond to situations just like Hurricane Harvey, and we are grateful to be able to partner with them to provide assistance to the Houston area. We know the need is great. That much is clear. We do not yet know all the ways we can help. > The church reportedly seats more than 16,000 people. Osteen, whose own Houston home is worth a reported $10.5 million, has not made any comments regarding possible flooding near the church. A map of the area surrounding the church shows it is under a flood advisory, but not a warning. (Houston police told us that they have no pending calls from the area.) Several Twitter users have posted pictures questioning the church’s statement, including an image posted by writer Charles Clymer that was apparently taken from near the church showing no flooding near the building. Popular vlogger Keaton Milburn responded: < maybe your anonymous source would like to see these photos. ones of the church actually flooding. know your facts first > The caption on the photos, though, suggest that they were taken near the church, not inside the facility itself. Another Twitter user posted pictures of her own showing no apparent street flooding near the church: Clymer also posted pictures from a third user which purportedly showed no flooding near either the church’s near entrance or loading docks: Another local man, Jorge Colmenares, posted a video on Facebook showing a lack of flooding in a garage he identified as belonging to the church. The footage has received more than 70,000 views. He told us: < I was doing recon around my surrondng area and checking up on my work location. Lakewood is always on my route. I was expecting to see flood in the garage area but it wasn’t at all. > However, he added, “Lakewood and it’s surrounding area was legit flooded out” on 26 August 2017, shortly before the calls began for Osteen to make the church available. Colmenares said he had seen pictures online reflecting effects on the church: < The church was flooded on the inside, garage level, basement level, not where the main floors are. It’s a huge place. > We contacted the church seeking additional details about why it was inaccessible — for example, if there was possibly flooding nearby or damage to the building — but we have yet to receive a response. However, Osteen did put up the following tweet:  < Our hearts break as we see the damage and destruction in our city. Please join us in helping Houston recover. Visit https://t.co/jXMX5VB3qS pic.twitter.com/00HtzOmeQL — Joel Osteen (@JoelOsteen) August 28, 2017 > The tweet linked to the following statement: < Dear Lakewood Church family, We want to let you know that our hearts are with each of you and your families during this difficult time. We are praying for you and we are praying for our city, and for all of those affected by the devastating flooding and rains caused by Hurricane Harvey. We love you and we love this city. And we want to help. Over the last couple of days, as the enormity of this storm was being realized, we have been working to organize relief efforts for the Houston area with our friend Franklin Graham and the disaster relief organization that he oversees, Samaritan’s Purse. Samaritan’s Purse has been, since it’s inception, organized to respond to situations just like Hurricane Harvey, and we are grateful to be able to partner with them to provide assistance to the Houston area. We know the need is great. That much is clear. We do not yet know all the ways we can help. However if you would like to register to volunteer with us, please do so by clicking the link below. Or, if you would like to donate to our relief efforts, please do so here in this page. We are working just as fast as we can on this and will update you with more information as it becomes available. In the meantime, know that our prayers for strength and comfort for each of you will continue, as well as our prayers for God’s help as we navigate the upcoming days and months together. We love you. And we are praying. Together, we will make it through this difficult time. > Osteen and the church later released a second statement: < We have never closed our doors. We will continue to be a distribution center for those in need. We are prepared to house people once shelters reach capacity. Lakewood will be a value to the community in the aftermath of thris storm in helping our fellow citizens rebuild their lives. > Clymer also posted a picture of what he described as “countless air mattresses” bought by the church, saying that it was “prepping to open its doors”. On 29 August 2017, the church confirmed on Twitter that it was open to evacuees and taking in supplies. Lakewood is receiving people who need shelter. We are also coordinating with the city as a collection site for distribution. Lakewood is also collecting diapers, baby formula, baby food and other supplies. Please bring these items to Lakewood at Circle Drive.

Nova Magazine.   “Houston Televangelist Joel Osteen Refuses To Open His Megachurch For Flood Survivors.”  28 August 2017.;Lakewood Church.   “Hurricane Disaster Relief.”   28 August 2017.;Brett, Jennifer. “Joel Osteen, Lakewood Church Respond To Claims He Won’t Open Megachurch As A Storm Shelter.” Atlanta Journal-Constitution, viewed via Fox23.com. 28 August 2017.

irma-barbuda-video

irma-barbuda-video

A video shows Hurricane Irma destroying buildings in Antigua and Barbuda in September 2017.

On 5 September 2017, as Hurricane Irma approached the island of Barbuda, a Facebook user posted a video purportedly showing the strong winds from Hurricane Irma ripping through a small town in the Caribbean: As news broke that the storm had reached Category 5 strength, with sustained winds of over 180 mph, the video was widely shared as if it depicted the devastation wrought by the massive storm. Within three days of its initial posting, the video had been viewed more than 30 million times. This footage, however, does not show Hurricane Irma. It actually shows a tornado that struck Dolores, Uruguay in April 2016: CNN reported at the time: < A tornado ripped through the southwestern Uruguay city of Dolores, killing four people and leaving hundreds injured, government officials said. More than 200 people suffered injuries and about 400 structures have been affected, said Sen. Guillermo Besozzi. Images from the city showed overturned cars piled on top of one other, shattered windows, and decimated buildings. > The BBVA bank shown in the video is located at the intersection of Gritto de Asencio and General Jose Gervasio Artigas in Dolores, Departamento de Soriano, Uruguay. The following image shows a Google Maps screenshot (left) showing the bank in October 2015 (before the storm), compared to a still from the video (right). The same strip of buildings can be seen in both images: Contemporary reports also noted that BBVA was one of many companies who contributed to the relief effort after the April 2016 tornado in Uraguay.

Roja, Cruz.  “¿Dónde y Cómo se Puede Ayudar a los Damnificados en Dolores?.”   El Pais.  16 April 2016.;Quinones, Nelson.  “Tornado Kills 4, Injures Hundreds in Uruguay.”   CNN.  16 April 2016.

detroit-firefighter-watermelon-fired

detroit-firefighter-watermelon-fired

A Detroit firefighter was fired for behavior deemed offensive and racially insensitive after bringing a watermelon to work on his first day on the job.

Social media erupted with expressions of outrage in early October 2017 after WJBK, a Fox Television affiliate in Detroit, reported that a novice firefighter, 41-year-old Robert Pattison, was fired for bringing a watermelon to the station as a gift for his new co-workers at Engine 55 in the Joy-Southfield neighborhood of Detroit. Although showing up on one’s first day with a gift (usually doughnuts) is a firehouse tradition, Second Battallion Chief Shawn McCarty told Fox 2 News, 90 percent of Engine 55’s firefighters are black, and some took offense at Pattison’s choice of offerings: < FOX 2: “Is it racially insensitive to bring a watermelon into a firehouse?” “To some people,” McCarty says. FOX 2 spoke to Pattison by phone, who claims it was not a joke — and he did not mean to offend his fellow firefighters. But he clearly did. Fire Commissioner Eric Jones says the Fenton native was officially discharged. > Certain foods, notably watermelon and fried chicken, acquired racially charged significance when they were used to caricature and dehumanize black Americans during the long period of segregation in the South following the Civil War. As William Black explained in a 2014 article in The Atlantic: < The trope came into full force when slaves won their emancipation during the Civil War. Free black people grew, ate, and sold watermelons, and in doing so made the fruit a symbol of their freedom. Southern whites, threatened by blacks’ newfound freedom, responded by making the fruit a symbol of black people’s perceived uncleanliness, laziness, childishness, and unwanted public presence. This racist trope then exploded in American popular culture, becoming so pervasive that its historical origin became obscure. > Although mixed, social media responses to the announcement of Pattison’s termination appeared to sharply favor the sentiment that Detroit officials overreacted by firing him: < ? Seriously? Heads up White people like Watermelon!! Firefighter fired first day for bringing watermelon to station https://t.co/mwnorC2fYB — America1st (@mepk00alcom) October 9, 2017 > < I constantly eat watermelon when it’s in season. Guess I’m racist. He’s lucky not to be working with hypersensitive a$$holes like them. https://t.co/kyyHP8Lvu7 — Laud Report ⭕ (@laudreport) October 9, 2017 > When asked by Fox 2 News if he thought Pattison, who said his gift was meant as a gesture of good will, deserved to be fired, Battalion Chief McCarty said he didn’t think so. “Between what he did and losing his job there were a few things that could have been done,” McCarty said. However, Detroit Fire Commissioner Eric Jones issued a strongly-worded statement defending the decision: < There is zero tolerance for discriminatory behavior inside the Detroit Fire Department. On Saturday, Sept. 30, 2017, at Engine 55, a trial firefighter (probationary employee) engaged in unsatisfactory work behavior which was deemed offensive and racially insensitive to members of the Detroit Fire Department. After a thorough investigation, it was determined that the best course of action was to terminate the employment of this probationary employee. > We invited further comment from the Detroit Fire Department, but did not hear back before publication time. We have not been able to reach Robert Pattison.

Asher, Taryn.  “Detroit Firefighter Fired for Bringing Watermelon to Station.”   WJBK.  6 October 2017.;Black, William.  “How Watermelons Became a Racist Trope.”   The Atlantic.  8 December 2014.

flight-crew-takes-knee

flight-crew-takes-knee

The flight crew of the New Orleans Saints' team plane decided to "take a knee" and refuse to fly the team to their destination in protest of players kneeling during the national anthem.

On 2 October 2017, the “satire” web site Freedum Junkshun published an item claiming that the New Orleans Saints were stranded on a runway after an entire flight crew “took a knee” and refused to transport the “group of thugs”: < Flight Crew Takes A Knee And Walks Off, Leaving New Orleans Saints Stranded On Runway The New Orleans Saints made the mistake of once again disrespecting our veterans, our country and our flag. After an embarrassing opening to a game with the worst ratings in Saints’ history, the players and coaches learned that their actions have consequences. Both the pilot and co-pilot of the Boeing 737 the Saints use to travel are combat-hardened American heroes. They flew sorties over Baghdad with Saddam’s best weapons firing back. They fought with their lives for your freedom and watched many of their friends die. Today they took a stand for those brave souls: “We couldn’t be a party to the disrespect. We waited until we were cleared and last off the runway for the night, walked out of the cockpit, took a knee and deplaned. They’re not going anywhere until tomorrow.” > Although it’s true that New Orleans Saints players kneeled during the national anthem to protest police brutality on more than one occasion during the early weeks of the 2017 National Football League season — including at a London game, before which the Saints kneeled and locked arms with members of the opposing team, the Miami Dolphins, on 1 October — the story about the Saints’ flight crew taking a knee in protest is pure fiction. (At the same time this fake news article was circulating, a similar false story spread involving television chef Gordon Ramsay and the aforementioned Miami Dolphins.) Albeit popular on social media, “news” of the purported incident was not reported by any credible sources. In addition, the footer on all of Freedum Junkshun’s pages includes a prominent “about” section identifying the web site’s content as “works of pure satirical fiction” and suggesting it exists to mock the very folks likely sharing its content: < We believe that there is nothing more precious than the mind of an aging conservative. Here we gather a boatload of bullhonkey, works of pure satirical fiction, to give the fist-shakers of the world a reason to hate. Reality is often in the eye of the beholder. You won’t find any of it here. Join the fun in the comments on our Facebook page where you too can watch David Hasselhoff running over someone’s poodle magically transformed into a crime against humanity by Barack Obama or yet another murder the Clintons got away with. >

Boren, Cindy.  “Dolphins, Saints Take NFL National Anthem Demonstrations to Next Phase.”   Chicago Tribune.  1 October 2017.

"singer" AND "lana" AND "del" AND "rey" AND "ban" AND "american" AND "flags" AND "concerts"
"trump" AND "flag" AND "rey"

did-singer-lana-del-rey-ban-american-flags-at-her-concerts

did-singer-lana-del-rey-ban-american-flags-at-her-concerts

Bethania Palma

Singer Lana Del Rey banned the American flag from her concerts because she can't stand to see it with President Trump in office.

MOSTLY FALSE

In late July 2017, conservative blogs reported that a singer had banned American flags from her concert because she “can’t even look at it” while President Donald Trump is in office. For example, ConservativePost.com reports: < It’s so typical of radical liberals. They pretend to be patriotic Americans, but immediately turn on their own the moment they don’t get their way. REAL patriots love this country no matter what, and will always work to make it better. Grammy-nominated recording artist Lana Del Rey is not a real patriot. Sure, she’s featured the American flag as a backdrop to many of her concerts in the past. But because her candidate didn’t win the last presidential election, she’s now banning the Stars and Stripes. > The post is based on a 19 July 2017 interview conducted by the music magazine Pitchfork with ballad singer Lana Del Rey, which covered a range of topics. Pitchfork contributor Alex Frank spoke to the singer at her recording studio in Santa Monica, California. At one point, Frank asked, “Is it harder to be romantic about America when Trump is the nation’s biggest celebrity?” Del Rey responded: < It’s certainly uncomfortable. I definitely changed my visuals on my tour videos. I’m not going to have the American flag waving while I’m singing “Born to Die.” It’s not going to happen. I’d rather have static. It’s a transitional period, and I’m super aware of that. I think it would be inappropriate to be in France with an American flag. It would feel weird to me now—it didn’t feel weird in 2013. All the guys in the studio—we didn’t know we were going to start walking in every day and talking about what was going on. We hadn’t ever done that before, but everyday during the election, you’d wake up and some new horrible thing was happening. Korea, with missiles suddenly being pointed at the western coast. With “When the World Was at War We Kept Dancing,” I was posing a real question to myself: Could this be the end of an era? The fall of Rome? > This comment was pulled out of the interview and aggregated by the conservative web site DailyCaller.com, which wrote the headline “Lana Del Rey Pulls American Flag From Tour Because Of Trump: ‘I Feel Less Safe.'” From there the story snowballed into claims that the singer had formally instituted a ban on American flags at her concerts because she can’t stand to see them — but of course, that’s not what she said. Although Del Rey did say she won’t have the American flag waving while she sings the song “Born to Die,” she didn’t say she was completely banning American flags from her concerts because she can’t stand the sight of them. She said she was rethinking her visuals in light of current events and a shift in politics, while noting that the flag may be interpreted differently in 2017 by an international audience than it has been in previous years. It’s clear from the contents of the interview that Del Rey (whose real name is Elizabeth Grant) isn’t a fan of President Donald Trump, but to say that she has enacted a wholesale ban on flags at her concerts as a result of his presidency is an exaggeration. In the past, Del Rey has had the American flag featured prominently during performance of the song “Born to Die” which is a rather morbid song. Given this dark theme, one could argue that the image of the flag displayed during the performance of that song was ironic, and was never intended to be patriotic to begin with.

ConservativePost.com.  “Singer Bans American Flag From Concerts,  Says She Can’t Even Look at It While Trump’s President.”;Proud-Patriots.com.   “Singer Bans American Flag From Concerts, Says She Can’t Even Look at It While Trump’s President.”;Jerkovich, Kate.   “Lana Del Rey Pulls American Flag From Tour Because of Trump: ‘I Feel Less Safe.’”    Daily Caller.   20 July 2017.;Frank, Alex.   “Life, Liberty, and the Pursuit of Happiness: A Conversation With Lana Del Rey.”    Pitchfork.  19 July 2017.;Kornhaber, Spencer.   “The Exquisite Horror in Lana Del Rey’s Nostalgia.”    The Atlantic.  26 July 2017.;Jonze, Tim.  “Lana Del Rey: ‘I Wish I Was Dead Already.'”     The Guardian.   12 June 2014.

trump-nfl-lawsuit-lifetime-league

trump-nfl-lawsuit-lifetime-league

The NFL gave Donald Trump a "lifetime ban" after he was involved in a disastrous lawsuit against the league.

In the midst of an ongoing public debate about national anthem protests by NFL players that grew to involve even President Donald Trump in September 2017, Internet users were reminded of an infamous 1980s lawsuit involving the now-defunct United States Football League and the NFL in which Trump had played a key role: The United States Football League (USFL) was a short-lived professional football league that played in the spring and summer of 1983, 1984 and 1985. In 1983, real estate mogul Donald Trump bought the USFL’s New Jersey Generals team and from then onwards gained increasing prominence and influence among the league’s owners, according to several accounts given in the 2009 ESPN documentary Small Potatoes: Who Killed the USFL? Trump repeatedly called for the upstart league to go head-to-head with the NFL by switching its playing season to the fall and winter, once saying: “My attitude has always been [that] the spring was a wasteland, and I came into this league on the basis [of], and predicated on the fact, that I thought the league would move to the fall.” On this point, Trump faced opposition from others within the USFL, in particular John Bassett, the influential owner of the Tampa Bay Bandits. Ultimately, Trump’s view won out, and in 1984 the USFL announced that their 1986 season would begin in the fall. Trump later described himself as the “leading catalyst” for the decision to move to the USFL season to the fall, although in 1987 the USFL’s former director of communications, Jim Byrne, presented an account of the spring/fall schism within the league that emphasized the role of Harry Usher, who had become USFL commissioner in 1985. However, the planned change in seasons did not work out so well in practice, as the USFL faced severe difficulties in obtaining contracts with major television networks (a key source of revenue), among other problems, which brings us to the lawsuit now so frequently connected with Donald Trump. The source provided for the meme displayed above was a 25 September 2017 Business Insider article that extensively quoted business journalist Joe Nocera, who offered his recollections about the USFL’s scheduling problems and their response to them: < At the beginning of the third season [of the United States Football, the league actually decided that for the fourth season they would go to the fall. The networks were furious, the players knew it wasn’t going to work out, the losses really started to mount, the owners were getting incredibly upset. Trump had a solution, however. His solution was, “We’re gonna sue. We’re going to sue the NFL for being monopolists.” The large part of the argument was, “We can’t get a network contract because they have all three networks locked up so they must be a monopolist.” The jury did, in fact, rule that the NFL was a monopolist that had harmed the USFL. They had asked for $1.2 billion in damages, and the jury said, “We’re going to give you $1.” And in antitrust cases that’s tripled so that’s $3. Add interest [and] that’s $3.76. > According to a 30 July 1986 report from the New York Times, the jury ruled that the NFL had violated Section 2 of the Sherman Act by retaining a monopoly power “to control prices or exclude competition” in the country’s professional football market. But jurors awarded such low damages because Judge Peter Leisure had told them they should do so if they were not able to say definitively that the losses suffered by the USFL were caused by the NFL’s control of the market, as opposed to the USFL’s own poor management. Trump hailed the verdict as a “great moral victory,” and the USFL launched a series of motions and appeals that culminated in 1990. But on the playing field, the 1986 USFL was postponed just days after the trial concluded, and the USFL never staged another game. Donald Trump was not a plaintiff in the USFL lawsuit in a personal capacity, but the team he owned, the New Jersey Generals, was one of the plaintiffs. Moreover, Trump’s long-time personal lawyer, Roy Cohn, was one of the attorneys for the USFL, and both Trump and Cohn gave press conferences and interviews about the case, criticizing the NFL and supporting the USFL’s arguments. And Trump himself testified during the trial. So while Donald Trump may not have been a plaintiff in the ultimately disastrous lawsuit against the NFL, a team he owned was, and it would be entirely reasonable to say he was a driving force behind the litigation. The final component of the meme, that the NFL levied a “lifetime ban” against Donald Trump for his role in the USFL lawsuit, is difficult to rate. Presumably it refers to Trump’s efforts to obtain an NFL franchise, something then-commissioner Pete Rozelle stated he would never allow, according to Leslie Schupak, senior managing partner at KCSA Worldwide, the USFL’s marketing and public relations firm: < [A] meeting [between Trump and Rozelle], held in March 1984, concerned Trump’s desire to possess an NFL franchise. Although he owned the Generals and spoke publicly of his love for the USFL, Trump (according to many people who knew him) anxiously wanted to ditch the upstart for the money and fame of the bigger league. Hence, said Schupak, Trump invited Rozelle (a man he knew casually through scattered social encounters) to meet, and had Schupak — with whom he had bonded — tag along. Schupak remembered it well. “They arrive, and even before Pete can stop talking on a casual basis, Donald starts his diatribe on how great he (Trump) would be for the NFL, and what it would mean to the NFL to have him as a franchise owner,” he said. “Donald is going on in his typical style, telling Pete Rozelle what he believes in, why he would be wonderful. It was typical Donald, in that Rozelle couldn’t get a word in.” According to Schupak, Rozelle seemed to be under the impression Trump extended the invite to discuss relations between the two leagues. When he realized what Trump was after, he turned cold and blunt. “Mr. Trump,” Rozelle told him, according to Schupak, “as long as I or any of my heirs are involved in the NFL, you will never be a franchise owner in the league.” The meeting ended shortly thereafter. Not surprisingly, Trump remembered the meeting very differently, in testimony he gave in 1984 during the USFL’s antitrust case against the NFL. Trump told jurors that Rozelle promised him an NFL franchise. He did not get one. Donald Trump was never a franchise owner in the NFL. > So, this aspect boils down to a second-hand account (which was contradicted by one of the participants) of former NFL commissioner Pete Rozelle’s supposedly telling Trump in private that he would never allow Trump to own an NFL franchise. However, any such personal feelings that Rozelle (who died in 1996) may have held along those lines is not codified or enforceable as an NFL rule today. Moreover, Rozelle reportedly formed his opinion of Trump’s undesirability as an owner back in 1984, two years prior to the USFL’s filing their anti-trust lawsuit against the NFL, so that litigation could not have been the motivation behind Rozelle’s purported “lifetime ban” of Trump from the NFL. On the whole, there are elements of this meme that are accurate: the existence of the lawsuit, the amount of damages, the involvement of Donald Trump. But the meme also fails to make it clear that Trump did not sue the NFL in a personal capacity, and the claim about the NFL’s giving the future president a “lifetime ban” is questionable.

ESPN.  “Small Potatoes: Who Killed the USFL?”   2009.;Byrne, Jim.  “Views of Sport: Inside the U.S.F.L.’s Power Struggle.”   The New York Times.  1 February 1987.;Janofsky, Michael.  “Trump Describes Talks with Rozelle.”   The New York Times.  24 June 1986.;Avella, Joe.  “Trump Once Won a Lawsuit Against the NFL — But the Result Was an Embarrassment.”   Business Insider.  25 September 2017.;Janofsky, Michael.  “U.S.F.L. Loses in Antitrust Case; Jury Assigns Just $1 in Damages.”   The New York Times.  30 July 1986.;The New York Times.  “Big ‘Moral Victory’ Claimed by Trump.”   30 July 2017.;Eskenazi, Gerald.  “U.S.F.L. Calls Off 1986 Fall Season.”   The New York Times. 5 August 1986.;Pearlman, Jeff.  “Trump’s Ugly Battles with the NFL Go Way Back.”   CNN.  25 September 2017.

photograph-beyonce-jay-z-holding-twin-babies

photograph-beyonce-jay-z-holding-twin-babies

A photograph shows Jay-Z and Beyonce holding their twin babies in June 2017.

Amidst reports that singers Beyonce and Jay-Z had welcomed twins into the world in June 2017, a photograph purportedly showing the celebrity couple holding their newborn babies was circulated on social media: The image is actually a composite of two photographs, each showing Jay-Z and Beyonce carrying their first child, Blue Ivy, in 2012. Here’s a look at the original Jay-Z image (left), the composite image (center), and the original Beyonce photograph (right): Although sources close to the couple reported that Beyonce and Jay-Z welcomed twins in mid-June 2017, the celebrity couple have yet to confirm the news. As of this writing, there are no publicly available photographs of the couple’s new twins.Â

Boon, John.  “Blue Ivy Uncovered! Rare Glimpse of Beyoncé Daughter’s Face During Shopping Spree.” E! Online.  18 July 2012.;France, Lisa.  “Beyoncé and Jay Z Welcome Twins.” CNN.  19 June 2017.

"san" AND "juan" AND "mayor" AND "relief" AND "efforts" AND "trump" AND "look" AND "bad"

is-san-juan-mayor-relief-efforts-trump-look-bad

is-san-juan-mayor-relief-efforts-trump-look-bad

A Puerto Rico police officer has revealed that San Juan's mayor is sabotaging relief efforts to reflect poorly on President Donald Trump.

RESEARCH IN PROGRESS

In late September 2017, as Puerto Rico struggled to address the damage from Hurricane Maria, mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz Soto of the United States commonwealth’s capital city, San Juan, spoke out about its worsening humanitarian crisis, which has been exacerbated by a sluggish federal response: < Carmen Yulín Cruz Soto told the world of the “horror” she was seeing as she waded through San Juan’s flooded streets. And the desperation on the island, parts of which may remain without power for months. Until then, Cruz had not been a well-known politician outside the island. But after she criticized Washington’s response to the hurricane this week — “save us from dying,” she pleaded on cable network — President Trump took direct aim at her on Twitter. “Such poor leadership ability by the Mayor of San Juan,” he wrote Saturday. Democrats must have told her to say nasty things about him, he claimed. > Immediately after this, rumors popped up about Cruz and her leadership (or lack thereof), up to and including a snippet from a Puerto Rico radio program purporting to be an interview with a police officer (but without any corroborating evidence or citations to support her claims; not even a name from the radio show caller claiming to be a police officer): < On September 28th A cop from Puerto Rico was able to get a call through a Hispanic radio station in New York (La Mega). She is telling what she is seeing as a cop in the aftermath or Maria and the government’s injustice Transcript: Radio Announcer: What is your name? Police Caller: I cannot give my name because I work for Puerto Rico’s Police Department. I need to pass this information out because the stuff that is being brought from the U.S. is not being distributed. They are not allowing the Puerto Rican people to receive the donations. Radio Announcer: What part of Puerto Rico are you calling us from right now? Police Caller: I am right now in Guaynabo. Radio Announcer 2: Wow. Radio Announcer 3: But what information do you have? What have you seen? Police Caller: The Mayor, Carmen Yulin, is not allowing anyone to distribute… We need… what Puerto Ricans need is that the U.S. armed forces come in and distribute the aid. And that they stop the governor, Rosello, and the mayor, Yulin, on doing what they are doing… It’s an abuse, it looks like communism, in our own island (sobbing)… (sobbing continues, inaudible translation due to cries)… Police Caller (cont.): People are helping us, but they are not accepting it, they are not accepting anymore help supposedly: “they have to wait for the license, that there are no buses.” …Let me tell you something Boricuas (Puerto Ricans) are dying of hunger (crying continues) … This is a bureaucracy, everything has to be protocol, the lines are stretched. …We can only give one box of water per person (sobbing continues). …The medics here, people are dying, the hospitals are in crisis. Police Caller (cont.): I am embarrassed, as a Boricua to work for Puerto Rico’s police and see that we cannot do anything. There are dozens and thousands and thousands of food and when people ask we cannot give anything away because [Mayor] Carmen Yulin says that we cannot take anything out; because everything is a soap opera, everything is a show and there have to be cameras here and there. ….Because you know they are just looking for votes for the upcoming years. Radio Announcer 2: Wow Police Caller: And the governor won’t move unless there is a camera behind him; [Mayor] Carmen Yulin won’t move unless there is a camera behind her. This is how we are living in Puerto Rico, meanwhile artists are giving money and the people of Florida are sending stuff, and I don’t know how many more people are helping because we have very limited communication, very limited, and we have no idea what’s going on outside; and the people who are sending stuff, they have to come in; they have to come to help Puerto Rico and distribute what is being wasted …because what else are we going to do? You tell me, what are we going to do? Radio Announcer #2: Of course the desperation.. Radio Announcer #3: We are with our hearts broken listening to you describing this situation which is heartbreaking when we know that so many people are helping …this is a police officer speaking. Police Caller: I’ve been for one hour and a half just trying to download an application because the phones that they give to us I cannot use them as a police officer due to security measures. But I need to speak for the people because the people are suffering. Because I, as a cop, and other partners are seeing it. A lot of people have been posting videos (sobbing – inaudible) …and no-one is paying attention. Radio Announcer #3: We are truly sorry for this situation, we did not know that.. Police Caller: If Cuba and Venezuela want to help and we are grateful for that; and that the government denies their help, the government denies Cuba’s help. …That they reject Venezuela’s help, …Look for God’s sake! Tell me how is that possible, we need help. Radio Announcer #3: We are going to send this message out so that it gets to where it needs to get to… Police Caller: We want the U.S. to come in, that the strongest forces come in and take the governor out, he is not doing anything, he is just going around and around, …and everyone is like: “oh, look how nice, the governor, he is going in the mud, he is going in the water”, And where is it? Pardon the expression: WHERE IS THE FOOD? Police Caller (cont.): Look, grab the food, grab the sausage can and take it to the families! Stop the show! The governor is just doing a show, is all a show. There are many mayors that are suffering because they cannot do anything for their people. Radio Announcer #2: What are they doing with the food? Is it being kept in storage because they are not allowing to give it out? Police Caller: They are not doing anything, and they tell the harbors (ports) that they cannot bring stuff anymore. If the U.S. government doesn’t get involved they will finish us. We are going to end up worse. …Worse than Cuba, Africa, or worse than Haiti. We are living in an era that you don’t want to see, people are desperate. The gasoline, people are already killing each other. Not to rob you, they are doing it so they can be the firsts to get food and take it to their families. Police Caller (cont.): Do you know what it is when a woman approaches me and tells me “I don’t have any more.” “I don’t know what else to give my kids because I don’t have anymore.” “Water and crackers”! Radio Announcer #1: Sweetie, thank you for calling us and using this medium to denounce this situation; and good thing that it was you who explained this so that people don’t think that we are making up stuff; because this has nothing to do with politics. This is a very serious situation. Police Caller: Very Serious (sobbing continues) Audio/video cuts off > Despite this lack of evidence, the rumors were immediately picked up and distributed as fact. We are looking into them, and we will update this page as soon as we find more information. This is a page in progress.Â

trump-obamacare-advertising-enrollment

trump-obamacare-advertising-enrollment

The Trump administration announced it would be spending 90 percent less on advertising a shortened open enrollment period for Obamacare in 2018.

In early September 2017, Facebook users began posting about several changes the Trump Administration had made to 2018 open enrollment for the Affordable Care Act (Obamacare). A typical message read as follows: < Please pass this information along: Enrollment for the 2018 Affordable Care Act (Obamacare) starts on November 1 and ends on December 15. Trump has cut the time people have to enroll in half. He has cut the advertising money to announce when people can enroll by 90%! He is trying to make it fail so he can pretend that it doesn’t work and replace it with his plan that will make millions of people uninsured. Don’t let him get away with it. Please pass this on–copy and paste! > Another Facebook post read: < …Trump slashed the Ad budget for ACA enrollment reminders by 90%, funding for ACA enrollment assistance by 40% and cut the enrollment period IN HALF. > The Trump administration has indeed cut the budget for publicizing 2018 Obamacare open enrollment by more than 90 percent, and did indeed cut the open enrollment period in half – from three months in 2017 to six weeks in 2018. Spending on in-person enrollment assistance (the Navigator system) is also set to be cut by 41 percent from 2016 levels. On 13 April 2017, the Center for Medicare and Medicaid Services (CMS) — an agency of the Department of Health and Human Services, which runs the Healthcare.gov web site — announced that open enrollment for Obamacare in 2018 would run from 1 November to 15 December 2017 – a shortened six-week period – “to more closely align with Medicare and the private market.” For 2017 sign-ups, the open enrollment period was twice as long – from 1 November 2016 to 31 January 2017, a period of three months. On 31 August 2017, CMS announced the advertising budget cut: < CMS plans to spend $10 million on promotional activities in order to meet the needs of new or returning ACA enrollees – consistent with promotional spending on Medicare Advantage and Medicare Part D. CMS will target its advertising and outreach activities to educate consumers on the new dates of the Open Enrollment Period through digital media, email, and text messages. These outreach methodologies have proven the most effective in reaching existing and new enrollees. During the most recent open enrollment period, CMS spent more than $100 million on promotional activities – nearly double what was spent in 2015 – but saw first-time enrollment decline by 42 percent and effectuated enrollment decline by approximately 500,000 individuals. >  The CMS also announced in August 2017 that there would be changes to funding for the Navigator program, which gives grants to community health centers, nonprofits, and private companies who provide free in-person assistance to people who find it difficult to understand or manage the paperwork and applications required to sign up for health insurance. This is what various Facebook users meant by cuts to “enrollment assistance.” The August CMS announcement set out a more strictly performance-related system for renewing grants to designated Navigators: < During the most recent open enrollment period, Navigators received over $62.5 million in federal grants while enrolling 81,426 individuals. Seventeen Navigators enrolled less than 100 people each at an average cost of $5,000 per each enrollee. Seventy-eight percent of Navigators failed to achieve their enrollment goal. For the upcoming enrollment period, Navigator grantees will receive funding based on their ability to meet their enrollment goals during the previous year. For example, a grantee that achieved 100 percent or more of its enrollment goal for plan year 2017 will receive the same level of funding as last year. These performance-based adjustments will ensure accountability within the Navigator program and avoid rewarding grantees that have failed to meet their performance measures. > A spokesperson for the Department of Health and Human Services told us that these Navigators will receive $36.8 million in 2018, a reduction of $25.7 million (or 41%) from the $62.5 million disbursed in 2016. Â

Kliff, Sarah.  “Trump is Slashing Obamacare’s Advertising Budget by 90%.”  Vox.com.  31 August 2017.;Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.  “CMS Announcement on ACA Navigator Program and Promotion for Upcoming Open Enrollment.”  CMS.gov.  31 August 2017.;Centers for Medicare and Medicaid Services.  “CMS Issues Final Rule to Increase Choices and Encourage Stability in Health Insurance Market for 2018.”  CMS.gov.  13 April 2016.

antifa-protest-sturgis-2018

antifa-protest-sturgis-2018

Antifa activists announced in August 2017 that they would protest the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally in 2018.

A meme claiming that “antifa,” or anti-fascist protesters, planned to shut down the 2018 Sturgis Motorcycle Rally due to the prevalence of U.S. and Confederate flags was widely circulated on social media in August 2017: However, none of the posts we viewed linked to a source showing that any antifa group had made such an announcement. It seems instead that the meme evolved from ideas generated by “alt-right” Trump fans and White nationalists. On 13 August 2017, a member of the pro-Trump subreddit /the_donald/ posted an image of a tweet by conservative political commentator Tomi Lahren that purportedly showed a large “Trump” sign at the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally. “Why doesn’t Antifa show up at Sturgis?” the poster asked. (Lahren’s tweet had come a day after antifa members protested a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia.)  Soon those on the far right began tweeting messages daring the anti-fascist group to attend next year’s rally and reveling in the idea of violence ensuing: Some took the joke a step further and posted a meme of a “Sturgis Survival Kit” for potential antifa protesters: Unsatisfied with simply daring antifa to protest Sturgis, others claimed that the group had actually made an announcement to protest next year’s event. We searched the social media pages of various antifa groups and found no mention of a plan to protest Sturgis in 2018. We reached out to It’s Going Down, an antifa news web site and digital community center, and were told that they were unaware of any plans to protest the annual motorcycle event: < Wait what? Don’t even know what rally you are talking about. Total troll. Looked it up, a motorcycle event? Another example of Alt-Right trolls trying to push violence, thanks for bringing this to our attention. > The idea that antifa activists were planning to protest the Sturgis Motorcycle Rally was started by internet trolls amused by the idea of violence breaking out. Although it’s technically possible that this protest could get “memed into existence” before the 2018 motorcycle rally, no antifa groups had announced such a plan in August 2017.Â

police-sweden-no-longer-investigating-since-migrants

police-sweden-no-longer-investigating-since-migrants

Bethania Palma

Police in Sweden admitted they are "no longer" investigating rape since migrant arrivals.

MOSTLY FALSE

In March 2017, British Brexit supporter and former UK Independence Party (UKIP) leader Nigel Farage was investigated by the United Kingdom’s broadcasting standards authority Ofcom for a grossly-misleading comment he made on his radio show which quickly went viral: Farage claimed, falsely, that the Swedish city of Malmö was Europe’s “rape capital”, thanks to the country’s welcoming a large number of asylum seekers in 2015. The claim made by Farage on 20 February 2017 was roundly criticized and debunked. But on 14 September 2017, Farage doubled down, this time citing conspiracy web site InfoWars to again push the narrative that Sweden is so overwhelmed with rape cases committed by migrants that the police have given up on investigating them: < Police in Sweden admit they no longer investigate rape as they’re overwhelmed with other crimes. This is an outrage. https://t.co/yEQbQxUyyx — Nigel Farage (@Nigel_Farage) September 14, 2017 > We investigated the claim by Farage that police in Sweden are “no longer” investigating rape cases and the claim made by InfoWars that the 2015 migrant crisis caused the rate of sexual assaults in Sweden to double. CLAIM: Sexual assault in Sweden has doubled because of newly-arrived asylum seekers. False. InfoWars, which is run by infamous conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, pushes stories not for their accuracy but for their ability to go viral by riling up readers with outlandish narratives about big-government, Illuminati, or Jewish power grabs. InfoWars also traffics heavily in fearmongering about asylum seekers, refugees and immigrants. The InfoWars article cited by Farage was written by editor-at-large and YouTube ranter Paul Joseph Watson, and bears the headline “Swedish Police ‘cannot cope’ with huge numbers of rapes since migrants arrived”. Watson reports: < Rapes have skyrocketed in Sweden over recent years. Authorities have claimed that this is due to the definition of rape being changed, but the spike occurred long after the change was made. Sex crimes in the country have doubled since 2012. The most recently available statistics showed that immigrants were 5.5 times more likely to carry out sexual assaults. > InfoWar’s main source for the story is Joakim Lamotte, a Swedish vlogger who filmed himself purportedly talking to a police investigator in Stenungsund, a city north of Gothenburg. (We reached out to Lamotte with questions about this exchange and got no response.) In his video, which he posted to his official Facebook page, Lamotte asks the investigator why police haven’t yet apprehended the boy suspected of raping a 12-year-old girl in Stenungsund, even though the crime happened in July 2017. The investigator tells him police do not have have enough staffing to cope with the crime because of other serious cases that have been given priority. Neither Lamotte nor the investigator make mention of migrants, immigrants, refugees, or even expats, and the InfoWars article doesn’t provide any evidence to support the leap from a police backlog to migrants. In fact, the article negates its own premise. Watson reports, “Sex crimes in the country have doubled since 2012” — but the influx of 163,000 migrants seeking asylum in Sweden didn’t even begin until late summer 2015. And although it’s true that reported sexual assaults doubled from 2012 to 2015, crime researchers have attributed the increase to the broadening of laws in Sweden in terms of what is considered rape. According to a study by Sweden’s National Council Council for Crime Prevention: < The number of reported rape offences has increased over the last ten years (2006-2015). The increase can be partially explained by the entry into force of new sex offence legislation on 1 April 2005. This legislation entails, among other things, that certain acts which were previously classified as sexual exploitation are now classified as rape. The effect of the statutory change appeared in the statistics such that the number of reported offences in respect of sexual coercion and exploitation declined in the years immediately following the statutory change while the number of reported rapes increased. As from 1 July 2013, the sex offence legislation was again made tougher; among other things rape was expanded to include cases where the victim reacts passively. > CLAIM: Police are “no longer” investigating rape cases because they’re overwhelmed with serious crime. Mostly false. The video created by Lamotte on 31 August 2017 went viral, resulting in news media coverage of rape cases that were being handled slowly by police. For example Radio Sweden reported: < One of the cases cited by SVT [Swedish Television] concerns a 12-year-old girl in Stenungsund who had been raped by an older man. Even though the police had the name of the suspect, the case was held on file for six weeks without action. Another involves ten men suspected of a gang rape in Botkyrka south of Stockholm which happened last August but serious investigations only began this summer due to a lack of resources. > Nils Norling, spokesman for Swedish police in the southern region, explained in an e-mail that resources are taxed by two things: an increased demand for serious crime investigations in the southern region, and also a shortage of skilled investigators, in part because the bar for becoming one is set very high: < There is a lack of rape investigators in all of the Swedish police regions. We need more of them, but it´s far from the easiest thing to become one. They´re very well educated in special skills and often very experienced in other types of investigations. We´re working hard to get more investigators to acquire the right skills and knowledge to be able to handle rape cases. > Norling also told us that there was an increase in reported rapes in 2016 compared to 2015, but added it was unclear whether this was due to an actual increase in rape or increased reporting of the crimes. He added that rape in Sweden is defined more broadly than in many other countries (for example, under U.S. federal law, rape includes penetration, whereas in Sweden it does not). But most importantly, Norling says bluntly: < We don’t see any connection between the increase in rape reports and the influx of refugees. > He also said it’s false to say police are “no longer” investigating rape — in the southern police region, investigators currently have 317 open rape cases, and in 250 of those cases, they have identified a suspect. Norling told us that there’s no overall increase in violent crime in Sweden, but the nature of recent crimes have been uniquely challenging for investigators: < There’s not an increase in violent crimes, but the cases we’re handling right now in the southern region, and especially in Malmö, are however more complex than before. The victims tend to be involved in criminal activities and this usually means that they’re not interested in talking to our investigators. This makes the cases hard to investigate and often leads to a bigger need of qualified investigators. That of course has the effect that investigation of other types of crime has to wait. Examples of the type of crime investigations that we can’t give the same attention to are theft, fraud and burglary, but in some cases also sexual crimes. > This falls in line with what we reported when we traveled to Sweden in March 2017 to investigate claims by Farage and other far-right aspiring media personalities that there is rampant crime, thanks entirely (according to them) to the country’s acceptance of a large number of asylum seekers in 2015. We were told by authorities and researchers that while there is not an increase in violent crime in the country, there is a new type of crime akin to street violence seen in impoverished neighborhoods almost anywhere in the world — gang-type crime with associated drug offenses and retaliatory gun violence. During our visit we interviewed Erik Jansåker, a police chief in Malmö’s southern areas, who explained that there had been a spate of tit-for-tat shootings — although the cohort of migrants who arrived in 2015 are not the ones involved. As we reported in March 2017: < [T]there is no massive new crime wave being perpetrated by newly-arrived refugees in Sweden’s suburbs — instead, crime today is an iteration of gang violence that has been going on in the country since the 1990s, starting with American exports such as the motorcycle gangs Hell’s Angels and Bandidos. Sitting in a small meeting area in [Malmö-based newspaper] Sydsvenskan‘s newsroom, [long-time crime reporter Joakim] Palmkvist explained that the motorcycle gangs were the “first wave” of gang organization in Sweden. They set the stage for the “second wave,” which to a large extent consisted of the children of people who fled the Balkan war. The current spate in violence in these areas is the result of a power vacuum in the organized crime community and the younger “third wave” — children of immigrants who have lived in Sweden most of their lives — who are now trying to establish themselves. What sets the so-called third wave apart from earlier waves is its chaotic nature, loose structure, and disconnection from wider society. The bar of what can spark a homicide is also lower than it has ever been; a wrong look or a leer at a girlfriend could lead to a shooting, > Chief Jansåker told us at the time that his investigators were handling 14 homicides — a larger number than usual and that had subsequently overwhelmed them, thus pushing them to seek assistance from other regions. However, the situation in Sweden is not the one presented by Farage and InfoWars. Instead, as Palmkvist, the crime reporter, put it succinctly in an email to us, the bottom line is that “Police fucked up big time in at least one rape case,” and, “police say that there generally are too few police officers around.” Farage, he points out, quotes InfoWars, which takes a specific issue and generalizes it to “suddenly claim that ‘rapes have skyrocketed’ since migrants started arriving.” Meanwhile InfoWars, as they are wont to do, sources obviously-slanted anti-Muslim web sites (like MuslimStatistics.WordPress.com) for evidence. Police in Sweden are short on investigators with the credentials necessary to work serious crime cases, and have thus been forced to prioritize murder and attempted-murder investigations amid a new pattern of gun violence in a community that does not readily cooperate with police. However police have not stopped investigating rape, as Farage claimed, nor is there a new, massive wave of rapes committed by  migrants who arrived in Sweden starting in 2015.

Watson, Paul Joseph. “Swedish Police “Cannsot Cope” With Huge Numbers of Rapes Since Migrants Arrived.”   InfoWars. 11 September 2017.;Kingsley, Patrick. “Sweden Calls on Army to Help Manage Refugee Crisis.”   The Guardian. 10 November 2015.;RationalWiki. “Paul Joseph Watson.”;Swedish Migration Agency. “Nearly 163,000 People Sought Asylum in Sweden in 2015.”   12 January 2016.;National Council Council for Crime Prevention. “Rape and Sexual Offences.”;Radio Sweden. “Rape Cases Put on Ice by Police in Favour of Murder Investigations.”   13 September 2017.;Federal Bureau of Investigation. “Frequently Asked Questions About the Change in the UCR Definition of Rape.”   11 December 2014.

clinton-women-caved-voting

clinton-women-caved-voting

Hillary Clinton said women voted for Donald Trump because they "caved" to pressure from the men around them.

MOSTLY FALSE

In September 2017, a purported quote from Hillary Clinton began spreading widely on Facebook in which the former Democratic presidential candidate appears to claim that women who voted for Donald Trump did so under pressure from the men around them: < Women voted against me because they caved in to pressure from their husbands, fathers, boyfriends and male bosses. > This is not, in fact, a direct quote from Clinton; it is instead an oversimplified version of something she said during an interview with National Public Radio that was published on 12 September 2017.  (The relevant portion of this interview, which can be heard here, starts at 3:10.) Interviewer Rachel Martin asks Clinton about whether she believes that sexism played a role in her defeat to Donald Trump, and if she thinks this might be because Clinton failed to inspire them. During her response to this question, Clinton recounts a conversation with Facebook’s Sheryl Sandberg: < …Sheryl ended this really sobering conversation by saying that “Women will have no empathy for you, because they will be under tremendous pressure — and I’m talking principally about white women — tremendous pressure from fathers and husbands and boyfriends and male employers not to vote for the girl.” > NPR’s audio of the interview skips to another question at this point, but the transcript continues with Clinton observing: < And we saw a lot of that during the primaries from Sanders supporters, really quite vile attacks online against women who spoke out for me, as I say, one of my biggest support groups, Pantsuit Nation, literally had to become a private site because there was so much sexism directed their way. So I knew going in that this would be a hurdle for me. > Earlier in the interview, Clinton noted: “I didn’t win the vote of white women.” The quote that spread widely on Facebook should not be attributed to Hillary Clinton, because she didn’t say those exact words and was quoting someone else to begin with — and she pointedly did not use the word “caved”. Neither did Clinton speak in such absolute terms about the dynamics at play among female voters or state that pressure from men was a motivating factor for all women who voted for Donald Trump, although she also did not offer any alternative explanations for why she lost among white women in particular.

Morning Edition.  “Transcript: Hillary Clinton’s Full Interview With NPR’s Rachel Martin.”  National Public Radio.  12 September 2017.

macri-trump-carter-award

macri-trump-carter-award

President Trump "vetoed" Argentina's decision to honor Jimmy Carter in April 2017.

In late April 2017, rumors appeared that President Donald Trump had pressured the Argentinian government to “rescind” an award they planned to bestow upon former U.S. president Jimmy Carter. For example, the The Intellectualist reported: < The Trump administration pressured the government of Argentine President Mauricio Macri to rescind an award to former Democratic President Jimmy Carter. Carter, a frequent critic of the authoritarian tendencies of the Trump administration, was set to be honored by Argentina with the Order of the Liberator General San Martín, the equivalent to America’s Medal of Freedom, however, the Trump administration moved to quash this. > CNN Español reported the same, citing an unidentified source. The award would be delayed, the source said, to “avoid conflict” with Macri’s visit to the White House. However, CNN also cited a second source saying that Macri would not have time to give Carter the honor because his visit to Washington D.C. was only two days long. The Argentinian government had announced on 30 March 2017 that Carter would be receiving the Order of San Martín, calling him “a defender of human rights” during his presidency and praising his offer in 1979 to accept up to 3,000 people who had been detained by the country’s ruling junta at the time. However, the announcement did not specify that Carter would be honored during Macri’s visit. We reached out to the Argentinian embassy to the U.S. seeking comment but have yet to hear back. A spokesperson for the Carter Center, the not-for-profit group founded by the former president, told us via email: < President Carter is honored to receive this prestigious award from Argentina, and looks forward to accepting it in Atlanta at a date yet to be determined. > Trump said during Macri’s visit that the U.S. and Argentina would be “great friends, better than ever before.” Prior to Macri’s visit to the White House, the two heads of state also spoke shortly after Trump’s election in November 2016, a conversation that was reportedly arranged following a “friendly and cordial” discussion between Trump’s son Eric and Felipe Yaryura, an Argentinian businessman with ties to both Trump and Macri’s administration. Yaryura allegedly put the younger Trump in contact with Argentinian Foreign Minister Susana Malcorra, leading to the phone call between Macri and the president-elect. President-ElectTrump also allegedly asked Macri for approval on an office tower bearing his name in Buenos Aires, an allegation denied by both administrations. However, the president’s relationship with Macri’s family reaches back to the 1980s, when Trump tried to forge a partnership with Macri’s father, Francisco Macri, between 1982 and 1985. After the two parted ways, Trump reportedly referred to the elder Macri as a “know-nothing.”

Cox, David.  “Argentina No Entregaría Condecoración A Jimmy Carter Por Pedido De Trump.”   CNN Español.  23 April 2017.;The Intellectualist.  “Trump Administration Pressures Argentina To Rescind Award To Former President Jimmy Carter.”   30 April 2017.;Buenos Aires Herald.  “Trump Vetoes Carter Tribute.”   28 April 2017.;Cox, David. “Argentina No Entregaría Condecoración a Jimmy Carter Por Pedido de Trump.” CNN Español. 23 April 2017.;Colvin, Jill and Superville, Darlene. “Trump, Argentine President Macri Hold White House Talks.” Associated Press, accessed via washingtonpost.com. 27 April 2017.;Obarrio, Mariano. “Acuerdan Con el Hijo de Trump Una Llamada Entre Los Presidentes.” La Nacion. 13 November 2016.;Thompson, Catherine. “More Details About That Trump/Macri Call.” Talking Points Memo. 22 November 2016.;O’Brien, Timothy L. “Trump’s Jagged Argentine Connection.” Bloomberg. 27 April 2017.

clinton-foundation-cargo-ship

clinton-foundation-cargo-ship

A Clinton Foundation cargo ship arriving from Africa was raided and found to contain "illegal contraband" in the form of foreign refugees, narcotics, weapons, and illegal fruits.

On 11 May 2017, a slew of disreputable web sites posted an article alleging that a massive number of contraband items were discovered during a customs raid on a container ship belonging to the Clinton Foundation: < A ship owned and operated by the Clinton Foundation was raided as it arrived from Africa this morning at the Port of Baltimore. The ship, which was supposed to be carrying “emergency supplies,” was actually carrying a cargo that had authorities stunned. BPA Harbormaster Jake Cummings explained to CNN: “We received a tip that the Clinton Foundation flagship, The Chelsea, was carrying illegal contraband into the United States. We honestly didn’t know what to expect, but what we found was simply…surreal. In the middle of the ship’s large manifest of containers, most of which were empty, we found 14 containing…people. Yes, people. They were all Refugees from places like Yemen and Syria and not a single one had any kind of documentation. We interviewed those who spoke English and were told that for $40K, anyone can catch a ride to the United States on a ship nobody would ever suspect.” > The article continues with a list of more illegal items allegedly discovered aboard “the Chelsea”: < Two other containers were also found to contain multiple crates of contraband, including illegal fruits that could potentially carry foreign insects and foodborne illnesses, weapons without serial numbers on them and no less than 30 pounds of marijuana. Several of the refugees were also found to be in possession of black tar heroin, an addictive, smokable form of the drug. > Without exception, all the above claims were fabricated, however. No such raid was reported in any legitimate news sources. CNN, specifically, did not run an interview with the Port of Baltimore harbor master in connection with this or any similar raid. We have found no evidence that the Clinton Foundation owns or operates any kind of cargo ship called “the Chelsea.” In addition, the article originated on a web site known as The Last Line of Defense (about which we have written many times), a “satirical” venue that cranks out false clickbait stories on a daily basis. As the site’s administrators note on in a disclaimer on their “About Us” page: < The Resistance may include information from sources that may or may not be reliable and facts that don’t necessarily exist. All articles should be considered satirical and any and all quotes attributed to actual people complete and total baloney. Pictures that represent actual people should be considered altered and not in any way real. >

Stryker.  “BREAKING: Clinton Foundation Cargo Ship Raided At Port Of Baltimore Reveals Sick Secret.”   The Last Line of Defense.  11 May 2017.

women-retain-dna

women-retain-dna

Women absorb and retain DNA from every man they have had sex with.

On 23 June 2017, frequent purveyor of misinformation YourNewsWire.com posted an article (“Women Absorb and Retain DNA from Every Man They Have Sex With”) that made the claim that “a new study” demonstrates that cells transferred from a man to a woman during intercourse become integrated into that woman’s body after sex. Every single time. In actuality, however, that study (which was published in PLOS ONE in 2012, despite being billed as “new” in 2017) demonstrated for the first time the presence of genetically distinct male cells in the brains of women (who had been examined in autopsy). The existence of male cells in the bodies of females, in general, is not news. As discussed in a PLOS ONE blog post describing that 2012 study, their presence is typically ascribed to cells from a male fetus from a prior pregnancy: < The idea of two genetically distinct populations of cells, or their DNA, residing in one individual isn’t new. It’s called microchimerism. […] Medical chimerism arises after a transfusion or transplant, and it may follow pregnancy. Our microbiomes, the bacteria within us, are more like guests than body parts. [The research groups responsible for the 2012 study] found Y chromosome DNA sequences in several brain regions in autopsy slides from 37 out of 59 women. Such DNA liberated from fetal cells can come from several sources: children, fetuses that never made it to be born, older siblings, or twins. Both son and daughter DNA partake in this “feto-maternal trafficking,” but female DNA, at the chromosomal level, is harder to detect amid the maternal two X’s. > The significance, in the case of that specific research paper, was that it demonstrated that these male cells — wherever they came from — were able to cross what is known as the blood-brain barrier — a semi-permeable membrane that prevents most chemicals in the blood from entering the brain. The linked study, in fact, does not once mention sexual intercourse as a proposed mechanism. This is as close as you will get from the PLOS ONE paper: < The most likely source of male [microchimerism, Mc] in female brain is acquisition of fetal Mc from pregnancy with a male fetus. In women without sons, male DNA can also be acquired from an abortion or a miscarriage. The pregnancy history was unknown for all but a few subjects in the current studies, thus male Mc in female brain could not be evaluated according to specific prior pregnancy history. In addition to prior pregnancies, male Mc could be acquired by a female from a recognized or vanished male twin, an older male sibling, or through non-irradiated blood transfusion. > At least that’s what they want you to think, according to YourNewsWire: < Through the study the researchers assumed that the most likely answer was that all male DNA found living in the female brain came from a male pregnancy. That was the safe, politically correct assumption. But these researchers were living in denial. Because when they autopsied the brains of women who had never even been pregnant, let alone with a male child, they STILL found male DNA cells prevalent in the female brain. At this point the scientists didn’t know what the hell was going on. Confused, they did their best to hide the evidence until they could understand and explain it. They buried it in numerous sub studies and articles, but if you sift through them all you will find the damning statement, the one line that gives the game away and explains exactly where these male DNA cells come from. > In an odd chronologic twist that necessitates abandoning the notion that time progresses linearly in one direction, YourNewsWire then used text from a paper published in 2005 to support the argument that scientists buried this salacious truth, discovered in 2012, in other “sub studies”. That 2005 paper, which does indeed show the presence of male cells in women who had never given birth to males (or, in some cases, at all), makes only passing reference to the possibility that sexual intercourse alone could contribute male microchirality to women, noting that the issue has yet to be studied: < Another possibility that has not been investigated is whether male DNA can be detected in a woman’s circulation from sexual intercourse without pregnancy. > That explanation is the authors’ speculative fourth suggestion (out of four) after three more plausible, and actually researched, theories: < One potential explanation for male microchimerism could be a nonrecognized (male) miscarriage. […] A second potential source is from a “vanished (male) twin.” A vanished twin is thought to be a relatively common phenomena resulting from spontaneous resorption of one sac or embryo in a twin pregnancy. […] A third possibility is from an older male sibling transferred by the maternal circulation to the fetus of a later pregnancy. [i.e. you are born with male DNA your older brother left behind in your mother’s body]. > A paper published, fittingly, in the journal Chimerism in 2015 investigated this topic further, concluding that — potentially — all of those potential mechanisms may contribute. That paper, which was fairly limited in its dataset, makes it clear that the sexual intercourse transfer of male chimerism remains entirely speculative: < A total of 154 girls were studied of which 21 (13.6%) tested positive for male microchimerism. There was a tendency that girls were more likely to test positive for male microchimerism if their mothers previously had received transfusion, had given birth to a son or had had a spontaneous abortion. Furthermore, the oldest girls were more likely to test positive for male microchimerism. However, less than half of microchimerism positivity was attributable to these factors. In conclusion, data suggest that male microchimerism in young girls may originate from an older brother either full born or from a discontinued pregnancy or from transfusion during pregnancy. We speculate that sexual intercourse may be important but other sources of male cells likely exist in young girls. > Far from demonstrating that 100 percent of a woman’s male sexual partners have male cells that de facto become part of their body, the studies cobbled together by YourNewsWire show that even if sexual intercourse transferred cells from a male that later became incorporated into the female partner’s body (which science has only speculated about at this point), it clearly wouldn’t happen in all cases. We are also unsure, for the record, what motivation would exist for scientists to hide the truth about male microchimerism in the first place.

Dmitry, Baxter.  “Women Absorb And Retain DNA From Every Man They Have Sex With.”   YourNewsWire.com.  23 June 2017.;Chan, William F. N., et al.  “Male Microchimerism in the Human Female Brain.”   PLOS ONE.  26 September 2012.;Lewis, Ricki.  “Male DNA in Female Brains Revisited.”   PLOS ONE DNA Science Blog.  25 October 2012.;Yan, Z., et al.  “Male Microchimerism in Women Without Sons: Quantitative Assessment and Correlation With Pregnancy History.”   American Journal of Medicine.  August 2005.;Müller, A.C., et al.  “Microchimerism of Male Origin in a Cohort of Danish Girls.”   Chimerism.  October 2015.

guggenheim-animals

guggenheim-animals

The Guggenheim Museum planned to host a Chinese art exhibition that included three installations condemned as cruel to animals.

Controversy surrounded a planned exhibition of Chinese art at the Guggenheim Museum in New York, in September 2017, amid claims that it featured animal cruelty. In a petition posted to Change.org, Stephanie Lewis wrote: < The Guggenheim is gearing up for a special exhibit to air for three months beginning Oct 6, 2017 called “Art and China after 1989.” If the Guggenheim’s plans stay as they are, the exhibit will feature several distinct instances of unmistakable cruelty against animals in the name of art. > We received several inquiries from readers about this. The petition highlighted and objected to three works from the exhibition: a seven-minute video showing eight dogs strapped to treadmills and forced to run on them while facing each other in pairs; a video showing pigs with Roman letters and Chinese characters stamped on them having sex; and a table covered in a see-through dome containing insects and reptiles. In its preview, The New York Times described these three exhibits. On Peng Yu and Sun Yuan’s “Dogs That Cannot Touch Each Other”: < The seven-minute video shows four pairs of American pit bulls tethered to eight wooden treadmills. The camera closes in on the animals as they face each other, running at high speed. The dogs are prevented from touching one another, a frustrating experience for animals trained to fight. The dogs get wearier and wearier, their muscles more and more prominent, and their mouths increasingly salivate. > On Xu Bing’s “A Case Study of Transference”: < The original version of the work featured two live pigs — a boar and a sow — having sex in front of audiences at one of the early informal art spaces in Beijing. The backs of the pigs were stamped with gibberish composed from the Roman alphabet and invented Chinese characters. The Guggenheim drew the line on live pigs in the museum, and settled for a video of the Beijing performance, said Philip Tinari, a guest curator, from the Ullens Center for Contemporary Art in Beijing. > On Huang Yong Ping’s “Theater of the World”: < …a simple table with a see-through dome shaped like the back of a tortoise. On the tabletop hundreds of insects and reptiles — gekkos, locusts, crickets, centipedes and cockroaches – mill about under the glow of an overhead lamp. During the three-month exhibition some creatures will be devoured; others may die of fatigue. The big ones will survive. From time to time, a New York City pet shop will replenish the menagerie with new bugs. > The Times preview also includes photographs which appear to support these descriptions. Whether or not these exhibits meet your personal definition of animal cruelty, Stephanie Lewis’s petition accurately describes the basic facts about them. On 25 September 2017, the Guggenheim Museum announced that these three installations would not be included in the forthcoming exhibition. < Out of concern for the safety of its staff, visitors, and participating artists, the Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum has decided against showing the art works Dogs That Cannot Touch Each Other (2003), Theater of the World (1993), and A Case Study of Transference (1994) in its upcoming exhibition Art and China after 1989: Theater of the World. Although these works have been exhibited in museums in Asia, Europe, and the United States, the Guggenheim regrets that explicit and repeated threats of violence have made our decision necessary. As an arts institution committed to presenting a multiplicity of voices, we are dismayed that we must withhold works of art. Freedom of expression has always been and will remain a paramount value of the Guggenheim. >

Solomon R. Guggenheim Museum. “Statement Regarding Works in ‘Art and China After 1989: Theater of the World.'”  Guggenheim.org. 25 September 2017.;Perlez, Jane. “Where the Wild Things Are: China’s Art Dreamers at the Guggenheim.”  New York Times. 20 September 2017.

statistics-crime-australia-gun

statistics-crime-australia-gun

David Mikkelson

Statistics demonstrate that crime rates in Australia have increased substantially since the government there instituted a gun buy-back program in 1997.

During the 1990s, Australia was confronting a problem similar to the one that regularly confronts Americans: shooting incidents over the previous decade had left more than a hundred people dead, including the infamous Port Arthur massacre in April 1996 that saw one gunman wielding a semi-automatic rifle kill 35 people over the course of a single day (including 20 people with 29 bullets in about 90 seconds): < In 1996, Martin Bryant entered a café at the site of a historic penal colony at Port Arthur, Tasmania. The 28-year-old ate lunch before pulling a semi-automatic rifle from his bag and embarking on a killing spree. By the time he was apprehended the next morning, 35 people were dead and 23 had been wounded. Bryant had become the worst mass-murderer in Australia’s history. Australia had experienced mass shootings before, but the Port Arthur massacre shook the nation to its core. Bryant was later assessed to have the IQ of an 11-year-old. He told investigators that he’d paid cash for firearms at a local gun dealer. > Shortly afterwards, John Howard, the new Australian prime minister, moved to enact nationwide gun law reform (a process complicated by the fact that the Australian national government had no control over gun ownership or use, so gun reform legislation had to be passed individually by all states and territories). Those reform efforts, known as the 1996 National Firearms Agreement (NFA), included two nationwide gun buybacks, voluntary surrenders, state gun amnesties, a ban on the importation of new automatic and semiautomatic weapons, the tightening of gun owner licensing, and the creation of uniform national standards for gun registration. Australia collected and destroyed an estimated 650,000 firearms (a reduction equivalent to the removal of about forty million guns from the United States), which reduced Australia’s firearms stock by around one-fifth. Around 2001, a piece appeared on the Internet that has been circulated widely and often ever since, attempting to make the case that Australia’s gun reform efforts were a dismal failure in terms of reducing violent crime: < From: Ed Chenel, a police officer in Australia. Hi Yanks, I thought you all would like to see the real figures from Down Under. It has now been 12 months since gun owners in Australia were forced by a new law to surrender 640,381 personal firearms to be destroyed by our own government, a program costing Australia taxpayers more than $500 million dollars. The first year results are now in: Australia-wide, homicides are up 3.2 percent, Australia-wide, assaults are up 8.6 percent; Australia-wide, armed robberies are up 44 percent (yes, 44 percent!). In the state of Victoria alone, homicides with firearms are now up 300 percent. (Note that while the law-abiding citizens turned them in, the criminals did not and criminals still possess their guns!) While figures over the previous 25 years showed a steady decrease in armed robbery with firearms, this has changed drastically upward in the past 12 months, since the criminals now are guaranteed that their prey is unarmed. There has also been a dramatic increase in break-ins and assaults of the elderly. Australian politicians are at a loss to explain how public safety has decreased, after such monumental effort and expense was expended in “successfully ridding Australian society of guns.” You won’t see this data on the American evening news or hear your governor or members of the state Assembly disseminating this information. The Australian experience proves it. Guns in the hands of honest citizens save lives and property and, yes, gun-control laws affect only the law-abiding citizens. Take note Americans, before it’s too late! > The conclusions drawn in this piece were both premature and inaccurate, however. In a peer-reviewed paper published by American Law and Economics Review in 2012, researchers Andrew Leigh of Australian National University and Christine Neill of Wilfrid Laurier University found that in the decade following the NFA, firearm homicides (both suicides and intentional killings) in Australia had dropped significantly: < In 1997, Australia implemented a gun buyback program that reduced the stock of firearms by around one-fifth (and nearly halved the number of gun-owning households). Using differences across states, we test[ed] whether the reduction in firearms availability affected homicide and suicide rates. We find that the buyback led to a drop in the firearm suicide rates of almost 80%, with no significant effect on non-firearm death rates. The effect on firearm homicides is of similar magnitude but is less precise [somewhere between 35% and 50%]. > Similarly, Dr. David Hemenway and Mary Vriniotis of the Harvard Injury Control Research Center found in 2011 that the NFA had been “incredibly successful in terms of lives saved”: < For Australia, the NFA seems to have been incredibly successful in terms of lives saved. While 13 gun massacres (the killing of 4 or more people at one time) occurred in Australia in the 18 years before the NFA, resulting in more than one hundred deaths, in the 14 following years (and up to the present), there were no gun massacres. The NFA also seems to have reduced firearm homicide outside of mass shootings, as well as firearm suicide. In the seven years before the NFA (1989-1995), the average annual firearm suicide death rate per 100,000 was 2.6 (with a yearly range of 2.2 to 2.9); in the seven years after the buyback was fully implemented (1998-2004), the average annual firearm suicide rate was 1.1 (yearly range 0.8 to 1.4). In the seven years before the NFA, the average annual firearm homicide rate per 100,000 was .43 (range .27 to .60) while for the seven years post NFA, the average annual firearm homicide rate was .25 (range .16 to .33) Additional evidence strongly suggests that the buyback causally reduced firearm deaths. First, the drop in firearm deaths was largest among the type of firearms most affected by the buyback. Second, firearm deaths in states with higher buyback rates per capita fell proportionately more than in states with lower buyback rates. > While there is no doubt that firearms deaths in Australia have decreased substantially in the years since the implementation of the NFA, how much of that decrease is directly attributable to the NFA is still subject to debate. Much of that debate focuses on the fact that the gun death rate in Australia was already decreasing prior to the time the NFA was introduced: < For Australia, a difficulty with determining the effect of the law was that gun deaths were falling in the early 1990s. No study has explained why gun deaths were falling, or why they might be expected to continue to fall. Yet most studies generally assumed that they would have continued to drop without the NFA. Many studies still found strong evidence for a beneficial effect of the law. > It’s also true that in both cases, the authors of studies cautioned that NFA-like plans wouldn’t necessarily achieve (and have not achieved) the same results in the United States, in large part because Australia’s geography makes it much easier to control the flow of arms into the country: < Several factors are important in assessing the extent to which the results from the Australian buyback can be extrapolated to other countries. Australian borders are more easily controlled than in countries that have land borders. In addition, Australia’s government in general and its policing and customs services in particular are highly organized and effective. The NFA also had an extremely high degree of political support and was quite competently executed. And the buyback was accompanied by a uniform national system for licensing and registration of firearms. These factors should be borne in mind in considering the extent to which the results from the Australian NFA might generalize to other countries. > < It does not appear that the Australian experience with gun buybacks is fully replicable in the United States. Levitt provides three reasons why gun buybacks in the United States have apparently been ineffective: (a) the buybacks are relatively small in scale (b) guns are surrendered voluntarily, and so are not like the ones used in crime; and (c) replacement guns are easy to obtain. These factors did not apply to the Australian buyback, which was large, compulsory, and the guns on this island nation could not easily be replaced. For example, compared to the buyback of 650,000 firearms, annual imports after the law averaged only 30,000 per year, with many of these bought by law enforcement agencies. > Regardless of how much of a cause-and-effect relationship there might be between the NFA and gun deaths in Australia, it’s undeniable that the firearms homicide rate in that country has decreased substantially since the implementation of the NFA. It’s not the case, however, as suggested by the misleading and long out-of-date online piece quoted in the Example block above (which was written way back in 2001) that the overall crime rate in Australia has shot up since the NFA was introduced. The rates of various types of violent crimes (sexual assault, kidnapping, homicides of all types) have scarcely changed at all, and while the robbery rate rose substantially in the 1998-2001 timeframe, it dropped below its pre-NFA level by 2004 and has continually declined since then:

Australian Institute of Criminology.  “Violent Crime Statistics.”   17 June 2015.;Hemenway, David and Mary Vriniotis.  “The Australian Gun Buyback.”   Harvard Injury Control Research Center.  Spring 2011.

sign-threat-group-islamic-america

sign-threat-group-islamic-america

David Mikkelson

A photograph shows a sign bearing an ominous threat from the group "Advancement of Islamic Agenda for America."

A photograph of an outdoor sign has been identified in social media postings as belonging to a mosque (or some other Islam-associated administrative building) with the cumbersome title of “Advancement of Islamic Agenda for America.” The sign advertises to viewers that organization’s ominous threat “AMERICA WE WILL KILL YOU ALL AND NOTHING YOU CAN DO TO STOP IT,” bracketed by invocations of the exaltation “ALLAH BE PRAISED”: < This photo was posted on Facebook, with a description saying it was a sign outside of a Dearborn Michigan Mosque. I suspect it is a case of hateful photoshopping! Can you verify if this photo is legit? > Neither the sign nor the organization is real, however. The photograph was a fake created using the Church Sign Maker, a web site that allowed users to create realistic-looking images of church signs bearing messages of their choosing: < Ever seen those signs in front of churches with the moveable letters? Ever wanted to rearrange the letters to make your own church sign? Well, now you can. Choose a design below, add your text, and a personalized church sign photo will be created for you! Save it, send it to a friend, put on your website, or use it however you like. Enjoy! Note: these church signs aren’t real, they don’t exist in the real world. You’ll be making a fake photo of a church sign. > In this case the “Advancement of Islamic Agenda for America” sign was clearly an altered version of the Church Sign Maker’s “Classic Design #5” offering (as indicated by the identical nature of the two signs’ sizes, shapes, and background objects in their photos):

"michael" AND "moore" AND "accused" AND "sexual" AND "harassment"

was-michael-moore-accused-of-sexual-harassment

was-michael-moore-accused-of-sexual-harassment

Numerous allegations of sexual harassment have been made against former film executive Harvey Weinstein recently, which may be why “satirical” web site Freedom Junkshun was inspired to publish a story on 17 October 2017 that painted documentarian Michael Moore in a similar light. According to the site: < Fox News reported Monday: While filming anti-gun movie Bowling for Columbine Sarah Slater, who was 16 at the time and on set as an extra, says Moore walked up to her and made “multiple passes.” “I rejected him every time but he wouldn’t take no for an answer,” Slater tells Fox. “He had me change into this really short skirt and he would just stare. At the end of the day, I was at a vending machine and felt a hand sliding up my thigh.” > In reality, Fox News reported no such thing. Freedom Junkshun is a long-standing publisher of false information. The site includes this disclaimer: < We believe that there is nothing more precious than the mind of an aging conservative. Here we gather a boatload of bullhonkey, works of pure satirical fiction, to give the fist-shakers of the world a reason to hate. Reality is often in the eye of the beholder. You won’t find any of it here. Join the fun in the comments on our Facebook page where you too can watch David Hasselhoff running over someone’s poodle magically transformed into a crime against humanity by Barack Obama or yet another murder the Clintons got away with. > However, that did not stop conservative social media users from trying to pass the story off as legitimate: As is commonplace, other websites—Conservative Columns, The Star Chronicle, USA First Information, and Defense Patriot—regurgitated the fake story without including a “satirical” disclaimer of their own. In reality, Moore criticized Weinstein in a Facebook post on 13 October 2017, saying: < I have intervened on more than one occasion and I have fired men who sexually harass women. Harvey Weinstein knew better than to behave inappropriately toward women in my presence. I’m guessing successful sociopaths like him who get away with it for years are very, very careful not to let the kind of men who would stop them dead cold ever get a glimpse of who they really are. I don’t live in Weinstein’s Hollywood world and I make documentaries, so I can’t speak to the culture he created and seemed to thrive in. I AM the only director that I know of who’s actually taken Weinstein to court (for being a thief, which requires a different set of sociopathic skills, but, like sexual harassment, you can probably find them at a few Hollywood studios). All of us (men) must share the responsibility for allowing a society to exist where women do not feel safe. A society where, when they are abused, they are not able to tell their stories without fear of retribution and shame. A society that badgers, blames or scoffs at women when they tell their stories. Or how they tell their stories. Or “how long” it took them. They carry a burden that most of us (men) never have to experience. If you can’t empathize with that or understand what they are dealing with, then maybe you’re part of the problem. > We contacted Moore seeking comment on Freedom Junkshun’s “story.” Weinstein, the former co-founder of Miramax and the Weinstein Company, has been accused by more than 60 women of sexually harassment or assault in the wake of reports by both the New York Times and the New Yorker this month, detailing a pattern of alleged abuse. He was subsequently fired from the Weinstein Company as well as expelled from the Academy of Motion Picture Arts and Sciences. Police in London and Los Angeles have opened investigations regarding Weinstein, while New York State Attorney General Eric T. Schneiderman is reviewing whether Weinstein committed civil rights violations.

Kantor, Jodi and Twohey, Megan. “Harvey Weinstein Paid Off Sexual Harassment Accusers for Decades.” New York Times. 5 October 2017.;Farrow, Ronan. “From Aggressive Overtures to Sexual Assault: Harvey Weinstein’s Accusers Tell Their Stories.” The New Yorker. 10 October 2017.;Lartey, Jamiles and Rawlinson, Kevin. “Harvey Weinstein: Police in New York and London Investigating Allegations.” The Guardian. 12 October 2017.;Winton, Richard and Kim, Victoria. “Investigation Launched After Actress Tells LAPD She Was Raped by Harvey Weinstein.” Los Angeles Times. 19 October 2017.;Twohey, Megan. “Weinstein Company Faces Civil Rights Inquiry by New York Attorney General.” New York Times. 23 October 2017.

A Californian and Ecuadorian couple proved it is possible to live on nothing but air.

In mid-June 2017, tabloids and similar sources published articles about a couple that purports to survive by eating little to no food. Akahi Ricardo and Camila Castello, the articles said, call themselves “breatharians,” and say they survive on “the universe’s energy,” along with pieces of fruit and vegetable broth eaten 2-3 times per week. This is not the first time that people have made this claim. A Wikipedia page for the practice perhaps best sums it up in noting that “[t]hough it is common knowledge that biological entities require sustenance to survive, breatharianism continues.” Notably, The Sun and many regurgitators of the piece repeated claims purportedly made by Ricardo and Castello without checking them against very basic science understood across humanity: < Camila and Akahi – who have a five-year-old son and two-year-old daughter together – have survived on little else besides a piece of fruit or vegetable broth just 3 times per week since 2008. And Camila even practised a Breatharian PREGNANCY – not eating anything during the entire nine months that she carried her first child. The married couple-of-nine-years claim that their “food-free lifestyle” has improved their health and emotional well-being as well as meaning they can spend money on travelling rather than the weekly shop … Camila explained: “I was completely open to changing my food-free lifestyle when I first became pregnant because my child came first. But I just never felt hungry so I ended up practicing a fully Breatharian pregnancy. “I didn’t feel the need or desire to eat solid food during the entire nine months and so I only ate 5 times, all of which were in social situations. > Throughout the profile (which was republished across the web with no additional fact checking), the couple alternately claimed to eat occasionally and to describe themselves as “food free.” Whether the couple claimed to eat very little or nothing at all, no apparent verification of their claims was made before pushing the dangerous suggestion one could live without food or water out to large audiences. Predictably, the practice has indeed proved fatal. Victims in Scotland, Australia, and Switzerland were among individuals who died in an attempt to survive without food or water. A 1999 Guardian article about the deaths quoted an expert on survival medicine: < Experts differ as to the absolute maximum length of time that human life can continue without water, but the broad consensus rests at somewhere between seven and 10 days – though severe dehydration and confusion (due to the build-up of sodium and potassium in the brain) would set in sooner. In the desert, of course, lack of water can kill in a matter of hours. “It depends on the climate, and how much exercise you’re taking, but if you’re lying in bed you would probably be just about all right for a week,” says Dr Charles Clarke, who specialises in high-altitude survival medicine and has accompanied the climber Chris Bonington on expeditions to Mount Everest. “But towards the end of the first week, you’d become pretty gravely ill. Your blood would become thicker, your kidneys can’t cope; multiple organ failure follows, you get hypothermic and eventually you die.” > Moreover, the couple profiled by The Sun weren’t the first “breatharians” to admit to or be caught eating food while claiming not to eat or drink. Jasmuheen, an ex-business woman and founder of the movement has never proved she doesn’t eat, demonstrates signs of eating, and nutritional experts believe the claim may be a delusion shared among individuals who underestimate their “occasional” eating: < Jasmuheen freely admits to drinking orange juice regularly and occasionally nibbling chocolate biscuits for a “taste sensation”. In the past she has described her diet as including tea with honey and soya milk, chocolate, crisps, soup and the odd piece of fruit. Thoeretically, a diet consisting of those foods in small amounts could represent a calorific intake to which the body could adjust without significant weight loss. Reporters visiting Jasmuheen’s Brisbane home have been bewildered to find her fridge well-stocked with vegetarian food which, she says, belongs to her partner Jeff Ferguson, a convicted fraudster. And a British journalist accompanying Jasmuheen to her check-in desk at Heathrow last December was astonished when the BA clerk asked her to confirm that she’d ordered an in-flight vegetarian meal. “No, no,” she replied. “Well, yes, OK, I did. But I won’t be eating it.”   > Although claims of “breatharians” surviving and thriving pop up every few years, we were unable to find any evidence contradicting the body of science demonstrating humans require water and food to stay alive. It’s possible the couple profiled by The Sun in June 2017 both genuinely made and believed their own claims, but we found no proof the impossible assertion was actually true. When tested, purported breatharians such as Jasmuheen failed to last more than a few days without food and water.Â

Gabbatt, Adam.  “Living On Light: Woman Attempts To Prove Humans Can Live Without Food.”   The Guardian.  14 June 2013.;Gabbatt, Adam.  “Seattle Woman Naveena Shine Drops Attempt To Live On Light.”   The Guardian.  18 June 2013.;Windle, Lauren.  “‘We Live On Air’ ‘Breatharian’ Couple Have Barely Eaten For Nine Years And Think They Only Need ‘The Universe’s Energy’ To Live… And She Even Ditched Food For Her Entire Pregnancy.”   The Sun.  15 June 2017.;New York Daily News.  “Swiss Woman Dies After Attempting To Live On Sunlight; Woman Gave Up Food And Water On Spiritual Journey.”   25 April 2012.;The Guardian.  “Let Them Eat Air….”   28 September 1999.;The Australian, via CAIC.org.au.  “Quest For Inner Peace Led Lani To A Cruel Death.”   20 November 1999.;BBC.  “UK: Scotland Woman ‘Starved Herself To Death’ .”   21 September 1999.;RationalWiki.  “Breatharianism.”   Accessed 16 June 2017.;Wikipedia.  “Inedia.”   Accessed 16 June 2017.

online-store-horse-burkas

online-store-horse-burkas

Bethania Palma

An online store is offering "horse burkas" so Muslim equestrians can clothe their pets in keeping with religious custom.

On 7 August 2017, the satirical web site Southend News Network posted a story reporting that an online store was selling “burkas” (clothing that covers a woman’s entire body and are worn in some predominantly Muslim communities) for horses. The post featured an image of two horses wearing protective gear to prevent them from being bitten by insects. Insect bites can lead to anything from annoyance and discomfort to veterinary complications in equines. A quick search on Google Shopping reveals full-body coverings to protect horses from the elements, keep them clean, and keep away pests like horseflies are easy to find and have nothing to do with religion. Southend New Network identifies itself as a satire site based in the English town of Southend-on-Sea in its “About” section: < Southend News Network was originally started in October 2015 with no real aims or objectives in mind other than to add a satirical/spoof-like touch to issues that people are passionate about in Southend On Sea. Above all else, SNN is all about having the occasional ‘dig’ at the powers that be, as well a slightly bigger and more frequent ‘dig’ at certain elements of local media! > The article about horse burkas goes on to describe tiny turbans to be worn by goldfish belonging to Sikh pet owners. There is no online shop selling “burkas” to horse owners.

Southend News Network. “Anger as Online Shop Opens Selling Horse Burkas.”   6 August 2017.;Thomas, Heather Smith. “Field Guide to Equine Allergies.”   Equus. 11 September 2017.;Molloy, Mark. “Anti-Immigrant Group Confuses Bus Seats for Women Wearing Burkas.”   The Telegraph. 2 August 2017.;Ali, Safia Samee, et al. “ACT for America Stages Marches Against ‘Sharia Law’ Nationwide, Arrests Made.”   NBC News.10 June 2017.

David Mikkelson

Photograph shows a new Boeing 797 blended-wing airliner.

Although Boeing may someday introduce a commercial airliner designated with the number 797, and although the company’s Phantom Works (advanced research and development) unit may have researched the potential of blended-wing-body (BWB) aircraft design for military applications, Boeing is not currently developing a blended-wing aircraft for commercial use, nor does the image displayed below represent any aircraft (or prototype thereof) designed or produced by that company: < Boeing to take on Airbus with (1000 seat) giant 797 Blended Wing plane Boeing is preparing a 1000 passenger jet that could reshape the Air travel industry for the next 100 years. The radical Blended Wing design has been developed by Boeing in cooperation with the NASA Langley Research Centre.The mammoth plane will have a wing span of 265 feet compared to the 747’s 211 feet,and is designed to fit within the newly created terminals used for the 555 seat Airbus A380, which is 262 feet wide.The new 797 is in direct response to the Airbus A380 which has racked up 159 orders, but has not yet flown any passengers. Boeing decide to kill its 747X stretched super jumbo in 2003 after little interest was shown by airline companies, but has continued to develop the ultimate Airbus crusher 797 for years at its Phantom Works research facility in Long Beach, Calif. The Airbus A380 has been in the works since 1999 and has accumulated $13 billion in development costs, which gives Boeing a huge advantage now that Airbus has committed to the older style tubular aircraft for decades to come. There are several big advantages to the blended wing design, the most important being the lift to drag ratio which is expected to increase by an amazing 50%, with overall weight reduced by 25%, making it an estimated 33% more efficient than the A380, and making Airbus’s $13 billion dollar investment look pretty shaky. High body rigidity is another key factor in blended wing aircraft, It reduces turbulence and creates less stress on the air frame which adds to efficiency, giving the 797 a tremendous 8800 nautical mile range with its 1000 passengers flying comfortably at mach .88 or 654 mph (+-1046km/h) cruising speed another advantage over the Airbus tube-and-wing designed A380’s 570 mph (912 km/h)The exact date for introduction is unclear, yet the battle lines are clearly drawn in the high-stakes war for civilian air supremacy. > This image is a conceptual picture from a Popular Science article about the future of aviation (one which proved so popular that it was made available for purchase in poster form) and has been circulated since at least early 1996 in fictitious articles proclaiming it to be Boeing’s response to competition from the Airbus A380 in the commercial airliner business. A Boeing company blog produced by Randy Baseler, former vice president of marketing for Boeing Commercial Airplanes, tackled this subject back in November 2006: < From Boulder, Colorado, Walter brings up a topic we frequently get questioned about: the “blended wing” concept. Earlier this year an image of a blended wing “797” made the rounds of the Internet, and got speculation swirling that Boeing has this in the works. Is there any truth to the emails showing a blended wing 1,000-passenger concept that is dubbed a Boeing 797? Makes sense that the airline industry would head this direction some day, but it just sounds too good to be true! Yes, too good to be true, indeed, Walter. Someone was having a bit of fun with PhotoShop perhaps. Boeing is not planning to build a 1,000 passenger commercial airplane dubbed the “797,” based on the blended wing body (BWB) concept or any other futuristic concept. It’s certainly not in our commercial market forecast, which goes out for 20 years. We think the commercial airplane market favors point-to-point routes, and we’re developing the 787 as the perfect match to help meet that demand. Glen, from Warrington, Pennsylvania brings up the same subject: Is there a blended wing in the works? Are there floor plans of it? No, not for a commercial airplane. But having said that, I should point out that Boeing Phantom Works, the company’s advanced research and development group, tells me it is conducting research on the BWB concept with NASA and the U.S. Air Force. They’re working to better understand what they describe as the BWB’s “fundamental edge-of-the-envelope flight dynamics” and structural characteristics. The Air Force is interested in the BWB concept for its potential as a flexible, long-range, high-capacity military aircraft. As part of the research, Phantom Works has built a scale model for wind-tunnel testing of the concept’s low-speed flying characteristics. There also are plans to flight-test the scale model next year. > In 2017, Boeing released a teaser image at the Paris Air Show hyping a medium-range, “middle-market airplane” under development that industry observers unofficially christened “Boeing 797,” but that was neither the real name of the aircraft nor did the visualization include a blended-wing design.

Baseler, Randy.  “Air Mail.”   Randy’s Journal.  1 November 2006.;Ostrower, Jon.  “World Gets First Peek at Boeing ‘797.’”   CNN Money.  20 June 2017.;Boeing.  “Boeing to Begin Ground Testing of X-48B Blended Wing Body Concept.”   27 October 2006.;NewTechSpy.  “Boeing to Take on Airbus with (1,000 Seat) Giant 797 Blended Wing Plane.”   24 April 2006.

patients-die-intensive-care-puerto-rico-icu

patients-die-intensive-care-puerto-rico-icu

All of the patients in the intensive care unit of a Puerto Rican hospital were killed by Hurricane Maria.

In late September 2017, as accounts spread online about the scale of the devastation in Puerto Rico following Hurricane Maria, a Chicago attorney shared a story his father told him about the deaths of every person in one hospital’s intensive care wing there, which dovetails with reports that the official death toll on the island territory is likely to increase dramatically. On 30 September 2017, Nelson M. Rosario posted remarks on Twitter that he attributed to his father, who lives in the territory. According to Rosario, his father “is helping with rebuilding right now” and has friends who were both “elected and appointed” to the Puerto Rican government. Rosario said that he shared with his father U.S. President Donald Trump’s online rant against San Juan Mayor Carmen Yulín Cruz that day: < The Mayor of San Juan, who was very complimentary only a few days ago, has now been told by the Democrats that you must be nasty to Trump. Such poor leadership ability by the Mayor of San Juan, and others in Puerto Rico, who are not able to get their workers to help. They want everything to be done for them when it should be a community effort. > In response, Rosario wrote in a series of tweets: < After I told him what the President said he went quiet and said “Wow.” A second later he says “I’m gonna share one detail with you. One. “There’s a medical center down here, and everyone that was in the Intensive Care Unit, died. Everyone. That’s just one detail.” He said that’s what should be tweeted at the President @realDonaldTrump, so that’s what I’m doing. > The post containing his father’s allegation has been retweeted more than 26,000 times: We contacted Rosario seeking more details about his father’s anecdote. As of 30 October 2017, 51 deaths have been attributed to the hurricane. However, the local government reportedly allowed 911 bodies to be cremated and listed as deaths by “natural causes” without further investigation, prompting criticism from Sen. Elizabeth Warren (D-Massachusetts): < These reports are extremely troubling — they provide even more reason to be concerned about the accuracy of the information we’re receiving. The Trump Administration needs to cooperate with Puerto Rican authorities and provide all the necessary resources to ensure the death toll is accurately counted. > Puerto Rico Public Safety Secretary Héctor Pesquera said in an interview published by the nonprofit Center for Investigative Journalism on 2 October 2017 (when the death toll was at 16) that the number of dead is likely higher: < I believe there are more dead, but I don’t have reports telling me [for example] eight died in Mayagüez because they lacked oxygen, that four died in San Pablo because they did not receive dialysis. > According to reporter Omaya Sosa Pascual: < When Pesquera was asked why the government insists on keeping the death toll at 16 nearly two weeks after the hurricane, and following multiple reports of additional victims, he said they have not added additional victims to the list because death certificates from deaths that occurred during those days in Puerto Rico have yet to be released, nor has it been possible to analyze the information to determine which were natural deaths and which were deaths related to emergency-related circumstances. “I’m not saying it has not happened, I’m saying we can only certify what we know. When that information arrives, we will validate it. I’m not going to hide any numbers. I’m not going to hide any data,” he said. > Pascual Sosa has also reported, citing local sources, that “bodies are piling up” inside area hospital morgues. Reporter David Begnaud, who is covering Maria’s aftermath from Puerto Rico, says that at least some of the deaths were “oxygen related” — in other words, people were unable to use breathing machines or oxygen tanks because they had no power after the storm: < Confirmed: Oxygen related deaths following Hurricane Maria, as well as, suicide and heart attack Source: Gov @ricardorossello pic.twitter.com/A1W9oEalpY — David Begnaud (@DavidBegnaud) October 4, 2017 > On 3 October 2017, Rosario again criticized Trump after the president told Puerto Rican officials they “can be very proud” that 16 people had died compared to the 1,833 deaths caused by Hurricane Katrina in Louisiana in August 2005. Rosario wrote: < The death toll is not 16 @realDonaldTrump, the death toll is much higher. This is so dishonest. #TruthForPuertoRico > However, we have been so far unable to verify the specific story that Rosario first told.

Summer, Juana. “Trump Attacks San Juan Mayor Over Hurricane Response.” CNN. 30 September 2017.;Pascual, Omaya Sosa. “Public Safety Secretary Admits There Are More María-Related Deaths.” Centro de Periodismo Investigativo. 2 October 2017.;Pascual, Omaya Sosa. “Hurricane Maria’s Death Toll in Puerto Rico is Higher than Official Count, Experts Say.” Miami Herald. 28 September 2017.;Prakash, Nidhi. “Puerto Rico’s Government Just Admitted 911 People Died After The Hurricane — Of ‘Natural Causes.'” Buzzfeed. 27 October 2017.

taco-bell-closing

taco-bell-closing

The Taco Bell fast food chain is closing all of their locations.

On 31 May 2015, a news-like link reporting that all Taco Bell restaurants in the U.S. would be closing on 1 June 2015 began circulating via social media (the hoax recirculated in February 2016 and again in May 2017). Although the link appeared to point to a real news story, it was generated by the prank web site Feednewz.com. While many people clicked on the FeedNewz.com link and realized that they had been fooled, many other users didn’t even bother clicking on the link and were left wondering if Taco Bell was really closing on June 1. Of course, Taco Bell restaurants will continue to operate during their normal hours despite what you might read on FeedNewz.com. This prank web site has also been responsible for stories about The Walking Dead getting cancelled and actor Channing Tatum‘s coming out as gay. A virtually identical version of the “Taco Bell closing” prank circulated in May 2017, updated to falsely claim all Taco Bell locations were closing by 2018:

obama-trump-travel-costs

obama-trump-travel-costs

After only nine months in office, President Trump and family had already spent $147 million on personal travel, amounting to one-and-a-half times as much as President Obama and family spent in the eight years of the latter's presidency.

The expenses incurred by United States presidents and their families on vacation trips and other travel away from the White House are an evergreen topic of partisan debate, given that much of those, including the requisite round-the-clock Secret Service protection and use of military aircraft for travel, are footed by the federal government. (By longstanding convention, even presidential vacation travel is categorized as “official business” for accounting purposes, since it is assumed, the Congressional Research Service tells us, that the president is always on duty.) In that vein, an Internet meme loosed on social media nine months into Donald Trump’s presidency made the claim that taxpayer expenditures on vacations, golf, and personal security for the president, First Lady Melania Trump, and their youngest son Barron had thus far averaged more than $16 million per month, as compared to an average of about $1 million per month for travel by President Obama and immediate family during Obama’s entire eight years in office. This is the text: < As of October 14, 2017 Taxpayer dollars spend on vacations, golf and personal security while not at the White house for Barack, Michelle, Malia and Sasha $98,000,000.00 over 8 years or $1,020,833.33 per month Taxpayer dollars spend on vacations, golf and personal security while not at the White house for Donald, Melania and Barron $147,000,000.00 over 9 months or $16,333,333.33 per month Not a peep from Conservatives. > If accurate, the comparison is all the more striking in that Trump was an inveterate critic of President Obama’s travel and vacation expenses for years: < President @BarackObama‘s vacation is costing taxpayers millions of dollars—-Unbelievable! — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) January 5, 2012 > < The Obama’s Spain vacation cost taxpayers over $476K http://t.co/W6kIpd5x They love to spend money. — Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) April 27, 2012 > “I would rarely leave the White House because there’s so much work to be done,” Trump told The Hill in 2015. “I would not be a president who took vacations. I would not be a president that takes time off.” While campaigning for the presidency in 2016, Trump said to the American people: “I’m going to be working for you. I’m not going to have time to go play golf.” In point of fact, according to a report in USA Today, Trump only spent five of his first 26 weekends as president holed up exclusively in the White House. The rest entailed trips to his nearby golf clubs. In early August 2017, CBS News White House correspondent Mark Knoller toted up how many days Trump had spent away from the White House versus the number of days Obama spent offsite and found that Trump’s total, at all or part of 41 days away from Washington, was nearly twice Obama’s, at all or part of 21 days away (although George W. Bush had them both beat at 61 days away). Although it’s too soon as of October 2017, just nine months into his presidency, to render even a semi-complete portrait of the Trump family’s travel expenses (such details are rarely released except in response to Freedom of Information Act inquiries, and sometimes not even then), preliminary indications are that Trump’s past criticisms of Obama will come back to haunt him. Looking at the information we do have, the Obama family’s travel expenses during the entire eight years of his presidency totaled approximately $106 million, according to the most recent FOIA numbers released by the conservative watchdog group Judicial Watch, who kept close tabs on Obama’s spending. The Obamas’ travel expenses therefore averaged about $1.1 million per month over the course of his term. Turning to Trump, the alleged $147 million already spent on travel by the president and his family during his first nine months in office wildly exceeds anything supported by actual data. That having been said, it does appear, based on the information available, that Trump and family have indeed likely outstripped the Obamas in terms of monthly travel costs, albeit by a smaller margin than claimed. Judicial Watch, who have vowed to monitor Trump’s travel expenses as closely as they did Obama’s (FOIA requests are already on file), reported in July 2017 that two months into Trump’s presidency taxpayers were already on the hook for $3.58 million in charges for air travel alone (i.e., excluding auxiliary costs such as Secret Service housing, local transporation, police protection, etc.) by the president, first lady, and vice president during February and March. That’s roughly $1.8 million per month, $700,000 more than the Obamas’ monthly average, which included the auxiliary costs we don’t yet have for Trump. Focusing just on Trump’s Mar-a-Lago trips, of which there were seven between Inauguration Day and mid-August 2017, an attempt at a more comprehensive estimate by the progressive watchdog group Center for American Progress Action Fund settled on a cost of roughly $3 million per trip — a total of $21 million for all of Trump’s Mar-a-Lago stays through August, amounting to $2.6 million per month). The reliability of that estimate has been rightly called into question, given that it was generalized from a Government Accountability Office report written well before Trump took office, but it is indicative of how high the Trump family’s travel costs — when they are updated to include actual Secret Service expenses and incidentals might well go. For that matter, obligatory Secret Service protection extends to all of Trump’s children, including his two adult sons, whose security costs while traveling are borne by American taxpayers even though they don’t work for the administration, instead running their father’s international business holdings. According to CBS News, lodging and transportation costs for federal agents protecting Eric and Donald Trump Jr. on their travels had already surpassed $190,000 by the end of President Trump’s third month in office. Also indicative is a USA Today report that in addition to his Mar-a-Lago residencies, as of 21 August Trump had racked up five visits to his private golf club in New Jersey. At these two locations, the Secret Service spent $60,000 on rent for the golf carts needed to protect the president. If that pattern continues, American taxpayers can expect to be dinged for as much as $103,000 per year in golf cart rentals alone. Although there isn’t yet enough information to work up a detailed comparison of the Trump family’s travel expenses versus the Obama family’s, it seems a near certainty, barring a dramatic change in lifestyle, that the Trumps’ expenses will continue to outpace the Obamas’ by a healthy margin, although nowhere approaching the $15 million-a-month disparity alleged by Internet sources.

Carroll, Lauren.  “How Much Do Donald Trump’s Trips to Mar-a-Lago Cost?”   PolitiFact.  18 April 2017.;Estepa, Jessica.  “The Six Trump Properties President Trump Has Visited Almost Every Weekend in Six Months.”   USA Today.  20 July 2017.;Halchin, L. Elaine.  “Presidential Travel: Policy and Costs.”   Congressional Research Service.  17 May 2012.;Johnson, Kevin.  “Exclusive: Secret Service Depletes Funds to Pay Agents Because of Trump’s Frequent Travel, Large Family.”   USA Today.  21 August 2017.;Kurtz, Judy.  “Trump: ‘I Would Rarely Leave the White House.”   The Hill.  23 June 2015.;Merica, Dan.  “Trump on Pace to Surpass 8 Years of Obama’s Travel Spending in 1 Year.”   CNN.  11 April 2017.;Strickler, Laura.  “Secret Service Costs for Trump Family Protection Continue to Mount.”   CBS News.  14 April 2017.;Associated Press.  “Here’s How Much It Costs Taxpayers for Donald Trump to Stay at His Weekend Getaways.”   8 May 2017.;Government Accountability Office.  “Presidential Travel: Estimated Costs for a Specific Presidential Trip to Illinois and Florida.”   October 2016.;Judicial Watch.  “Judicial Watch Sues Pentagon, Secret Service for Records of Costs for Presidential and VIP Travel.”   8 May 2017.;Judicial Watch.  “New Obama Travel Costs Bring Eight-Year Total Over $96 Million.”   29 December 2016.;Judicial Watch.  “Total Obama Travel Costs So Far, $106 Million.”   15 September 2017.;Judicial Watch.  “Trump Administration Air Travel Costs $3.58 Million.”   14 July 2017.

kill-chainsaw-haunted-california

kill-chainsaw-haunted-california

David Mikkelson

A man killed seven people with a chainsaw at a haunted house in California.

On 5 October 2014, the Daily Buzz Live web site reported that a man had killed seven people with a chainsaw at a haunted house in Los Angeles: < A Los Angeles, California man is in custody, and 7 people are dead after a tragic attack inside an East LA hunted house attraction over the weekend that was caught on surveillance video. A Hispanic male, 26-year-old Luis Ortega, entered the Texas Chainsaw Massacre House of Horrors on Friday’s opening night wielding a chainsaw. > The article quoted people who had witnessed the attack and included surveillance footage of the incident taken from a security camera: While the video accompanying the article was real, it did not capture a man killing seven people with a chainsaw outside of a haunted house. Instead, the video showed an incident from February 2012 in which a man was kicked out of a pub in England. Dean Dinnen, 24, was booted from the Endyke Pub in Hull after he refused to put out a cigarette; the inebriated man then chased patrons with a gas powered chainsaw and injured one woman before patrons subdued him in the street. Dinnen was sentenced to three years in prison for his assault. The video saw a surge in popularity after it was combined with a backstory about a man’s killing seven people at a haunted house with a chainsaw, but no such incident took place. The story about the haunted house killings is fiction, and the video is an old one repurposed to lend it credence. Moreover, a disclaimer on Daily Buzz Live explains that articles on the web site are for “entertainment purposes only” and that while some stories may be “inspired by real news events,” they are “complete fiction.”

is-the-mandalay-bay-security-guard-missing

is-the-mandalay-bay-security-guard-missing

Bethania Palma

Mandalay Bay security guard Jesus Campos is "missing."

In the days following the 1 October 2017 mass shooting in Las Vegas, various conspiratorial web sites and Internet personalities began casting aspersions on a wounded Mandalay Bay security guard, falsely claiming he was an “accomplice” to gunman Stephen Paddock, 64, who killed 58 people and injured hundreds more in the deadliest mass shooting in modern American history before turning the gun on himself. At about 10:05 P.M., Paddock began firing from the 32nd floor of the Mandalay Bay Resort and Casino on a crowd of 22,000 people attending an outdoor country music festival. In the minutes before the mass shooting started, Paddock fired 200 bullets into the hotel hallway, wounding security guard Jesus Campos in the leg. Campos has been hailed as a hero for his actions that night, warning a building engineer about the gunfire and helping police evacuate the floor despite his leg wound. As we have reported, there is no evidence Campos was involved in the shooting other than being victimized when he, along with hundreds of others, was wounded in the attack. The Las Vegas Metropolitan Police Department, the law enforcement agency leading the investigation, has repeatedly said that Paddock was the only shooter that night. Nevertheless, various disreputable web sites have already been busily spreading misinformation that Campos was implicated as a second gunman, and that authorities had arrested him as such. Both claims are completely untrue and have been roundly debunked. Conspiracy theories were kicked up anew on 12 October 2017, when the 24-year-old Campos abruptly cancelled media interviews, including a scheduled appearance on Sean Hannity’s popular Fox News show. According to his union, Campos went to a walk-in medical clinic that night instead. No other explanation for the cancelled appearances has been offered. Although many may find it unsurprising that a person who narrowly escaped mass murder days earlier would want to lay low, the cancelled appearances caused a cascade of meltdowns among the conspiracy-minded and attention-seeking. For example, in all-capital letters, Ann Coulter tweeted, “MANDALAY BAY SECURITY GUARD, JESUS CAMPOS, NOW MISSING AFTER SCHEDULING 5 MEDIA INTERVIEWS.” Self-deputized “investigative journalist” Laura Loomer declared, “If #JesusCampos is truly a hero, why would he cancel his interview with @seanhannity ? That’s like ripping up a winning lotery [sic] ticket!” Some mainstream news outlets reported that Campos had “vanished,” which implied he had disappeared entirely, leaving no trace behind. However, Campos appears to have merely withdrawn from the public eye, while his current whereabouts remain privately known by some (such as LVMPD). LVMPD officer Larry Hadfield told us that Campos is not missing, and reiterated that Paddock had no accomplices when he rained bullets down on the Route 91 Harvest Festival. Hadfield told us, flat-out: < [Campos] is not missing. He’s not under arrest. We tell people what we know. If they don’t believe it but they’re going to believe whatever web site, then I don’t know what else to tell you. > David Hickey, international president of the International Union, Security, Police and Fire Professionals of America, the union that represents Campos, told us the last time he saw the injured guard was the day of his scheduled interviews. Hickey described Campos as “humble” and wanting to get his story out so he could leave the traumatic events behind him: < When I talked to him he wanted to tell his story, he said he wanted to ‘get it all done in one day and move on with my life.’ > But when Hickey emerged from a meeting just hours before Campos was scheduled to go on Hannity’s show, he told us he discovered that the young man, along with another union member and a security guard protecting Campos, had left: < We did receive a text from my other officer saying, ‘We’re on our way to [walk-in clinic] Quick Care.’ That was the last response we got. We made multiple calls for two days and received no return calls. > We sent an inquiry to Mandalay Bay’s parent company, MGM Resorts International, and they sent us the following statement, noting Campos does not wish to be in the limelight: < Jesus Campos wants to tell his story at a time and place of his choosing. He’s asked that everyone respect his request for privacy. We could not be more proud of Jesus. > Campos taped an interview on the NBC talk show hosted by Ellen Degeneres which is set to air on 18 October 2017. Appearing with building engineer Stephen Schuck, previews show Campos describing encountering gunfire in the hallway, feeling a burning sensation and noticing that he was wounded. Although Campos’s guard detail created yet another thread to which amateur Internet sleuths could cling, Ryan Graney, who represents the family of Victoria Soto — a teacher killed protecting her students during the 2012 Sandy Hook Elementary massacre — told us it makes sense that Campos, now the accidental target of conspiracy theorists and “truthers,” is under guard: < In my rational mind [the fact he has security] makes sense because these people, the hoaxers especially, will go out of their way to take this offline. These people have shown up at Vicki’s 5k before. I had a woman follow me into federal court. These people will show up and they will harass the victims. He definitely needs some kind of protection because they will go to great lengths to prove in their paranoid minds what they think is right. They are scary individuals. > Sandy Hook “truthers” have been on a crusade to prove that the thoroughly covered and well-documented massacre of children was a “false flag” engineered by the government in the service of the “New World Order,” a ubiquitous but vague conspiracy theory peddled by the likes of InfoWars host Alex Jones, in which a secret but powerful cabal seeks to institute an autocratic global regime which will only be enabled once the government has seized all the guns from Americans. At least two “truthers” have been arrested for things like harassing or sending death threats to victims’ families. Graney said those same “truthers” are currently whipping themselves into an online frenzy over Campos: poring over photographs for supposed discrepancies, attempting to track his whereabouts, and scrutinizing a public database for the Nevada Private Investigator’s Licensing Board (a spokesman for the board told us that agency has no jurisdiction over casino security guards like Campos). Richard A. Patterson, a founding partner of the law firm Owen, Patterson & Owen, which has filed a petition to have the courts appoint a public administrator to oversee Paddock’s assets in lieu of pending litigation on behalf of victims, told us that Campos’s hesitance to speak to the media and maintain a low profile is not surprising: < Based on my clients’ experiences, it’s a lot just to have the courage to speak publicly once and deal with the exposure in the media and post-traumatic stress they’re suffering from. It’s reliving the tragedy. It would be very reasonable to expect that Mr. Campos has either been directed by his medical care providers or his family or from his own sense of balance to withdraw from public appearances at this point. I think we owe him the opportunity to get a couple of weeks behind him that will enable him to gather his strength and his emotional focus to be able to deal with these things. In our opinion, he’s a hero. > This is not the first time a person’s lack of desire to speak to the media has been misconstrued as that person being “missing.” For months in late 2016, online conspiracy theorists set about searching for signs of Eric Braverman, a former Clinton Foundation executive officer they believed had disappeared due to nefarious activity by the Clintons in an effort silence potential critics. After intense online speculation about his whereabouts, Braverman surfaced in mid-January 2017 to publicly announce he was taking on a new job.

Fox News. “Las Vegas Guard Jesus Campos Vanished After Visiting Urgent-Care Clinic, Union Leader Says.”   16 October 2017.;RT. “Vegas Security Guard’s Disappearance Baffles Media, Massacre Timeline Changes Again.”   14 October 2017.;Joseph, Brian, et al. “Mandalay Bay Security Guard Skips TV Interviews After Las Vegas Shooting.”   Las Vegas Review-Journal. 13 October 2017.;Pearce, Matt, and Winton, Richard. “New Disclosure Shows a Casino Guard Alerted Hotel to Gunman Before Vegas Massacre Began. So Why Did It Take So Long to Stop Him?”   Los Angeles Times. 10 October 2017.;Davich, Jerry. “Conspiracy Theories About Las Vegas Shooting Plant Seeds of Doubt, Intrigue.”   Chicago Tribune. 10 October 2017.

"mi5" AND "agent" AND "deathbed" AND "killed" AND "princess" AND "diana"

retired-mi5-agent-confesses-on-deathbed-i-killed-princess-diana

retired-mi5-agent-confesses-on-deathbed-i-killed-princess-diana

A retired MI5 agent confessed on his death bed to having assassinated Princess Diana.

On 19 June 2017, the YourNewsWire web site published the implausible claim that a former MI5 agent named John Hopkins had confessed to assassinating Princess Diana in 1997: < An 80-year-old retired MI5 agent, John Hopkins, has made a series of astonishing confessions since he was released from hospital in London on Wednesday and told he has weeks to live. Hopkins claims to have been involved in 23 assassinations for the British intelligence agency between 1973 and 1999, including Princess Diana. The 80-year-old British man claims he was involved with MI5 assassinations between June 1973 and December 1999, during a period he says “the MI5 operated with less external oversight.” Hopkins says he was part of a cell of seven operatives who were trusted to carry out political assassinations across the UK. Most victims were politicians, activists, journalists and union leaders. Mr. Hopkins says Princess Diana is unique among his victims, as she is the only female he ever assassinated, as well as the only Royal. She is also the only victim that the Royal Family themselves ordered to be taken out … He claims to feel “ambivalent” about Princess Diana’s death. On the one hand, Diana was “a beautiful, kind-hearted woman” who did not deserve to have her life cut short. But according to Mr. Hopkins, she was also placing the British Crown at risk: > There was no truth to the story, which originated with YourNewsWire, a fake news site. As is often the case with fake news, the article lacked critical details such as when and where the confession occurred or how the purported assassination took place, and no other credible news outlet (or even tabloid) reported the story. Moreover, the image originated with a 2010 news story in Australia, not a 2017 “deathbed confession” in the United Kingdom. The MI5 agent deathbed confession story was not the first of its type proffered by YourNewsWire, a site known for promoting baseless conspiracy theories.

equinox-egg-broom-balance

equinox-egg-broom-balance

David Mikkelson

A special property of the equinox allows eggs (or brooms) to be balanced on their ends that day. See Example( s )

Every year on the vernal and autumnal equinoxes (on or about March 20 and September 22), the two days per year in which the length of day and night are the same, we hear about a magical property of these days that allows eggs to be balanced on end. Rarely does a year go by in which a local TV news station doesn’t send a reporter out to a neighborhood park to capture images of people delightedly placing eggs on the ground and watching in amazement as the eggs stand on end. Rarely do we see any new stories reporting that this same feat can be achieved every other day of the year as well. The equinoxes, which mark the beginning of spring and autumn, have long held a special importance in human society. Particularly the vernal equinox, which marks the first day of spring and the end of winter, the beginning of the season in which daylight again outlasts darkness and life springs anew. Flowers blossom, trees shoot out new leaves and branches, and animals give birth (or their eggs hatch). These tangible signs of the world’s rebirth were of paramount importance to agricultural societies, and they naturally developed elaborate fertility rites to celebrate the occasion. Thus eggs — one of the most ubiquitous symbols of fertility and birth — have long been associated with the beginning of spring, and hence with the equinox. Many, many superstitions involving the breaking, balancing, burying, decorating, reading (for purposes of divination) and hiding of eggs have come to be part of the annual spring celebration. (The linking of egg-balancing with spring celebrations is demonstrated by the fact that the practice is associated primarily with the vernal equinox and far less commonly with the autumnal equinox.) Nonetheless, the vernal equinox brings no special egg-balancing properties with it. Standing an egg on its end is something just about anyone can do any day of the year; the feat simply takes the right egg and a little trial and practice. Since the vast majority of people never see or try balancing eggs on their ends on any day other than the equinox, though, many of them come away from the experience believing that something special must have occurred on that particular day. As the Associated Press reported in 1987, however, scientific trial shows otherwise: < Egg balancing, most popular at the spring equinox in March but said to be possible in both seasons, has attracted publicity in recent years — with scientists skeptical and ritual-makers adamant. Finally a scientist has published research into the matter and concluded that yes indeed, he could balance an egg — actually several eggs — at the moment of the equinox. But, on the other side of the coin, he was also able to do so at lots of other times. “The upshot is that, as far as I can tell, there isn’t too much relationship between astronomical phenomena and balancing eggs. It is basically a function of the shape of the egg and the surface,” said astronomer Frank D. Ghigo. Ghigo, of the University of Minnesota, decided to study egg balancing after receiving questions about it from members of the public who had read about the annual spring egg balancing festival in New York City. Ghigo used four samples of a dozen eggs each, which he attempted to balance on their large ends on a Formica tabletop each day between Feb. 27 and April 3, 1984. The spring equinox occurred on March 20, 1984. Ghigo found the eggs have many bumps and irregularities and with patience some of them could be made to balance virtually every day — while some eggs would simply never balance, on the equinox or otherwise. He concluded that “the mood and persistence of the balancer has a major effect on the balancing rate. If one is impatient or nervous, the rate is low.” Over time, Ghigo found, the percentage of eggs he could balance improved, concluding “I think I got better, just through practice.” > The following video clip shows an egg being balanced on end during a non-equinox day:

Brown, David.  “”Balancing an Egg on Vernal Equinox: Fact or Fiction?”   WCVB-TV [Boston]  19 March 2008.;Cohen, Hennig and Tristram Potter Coffin.  The Folklore of American Holidays.   Detroit: Gale Research Co., 1991  (p. 119).;Olsen, Eddie.  “The Scene.”   Philadelphia Inquirer.  21 March 1984.;Schmid, Randolph E.  “Equinox Returns and Eggs Keep Balance.”   The Lewiston Daily Sun.  19 September 1987.

snapchat-facial-recognition

snapchat-facial-recognition

Viral Phenomena

Snapchat is using its "Lenses" photo and video filtering technology to create a facial recognition database for use by law enforcement agencies.

One of the more whimsical messaging options offered by Snapchat — a social media app for mobile devices introduced in 2011 — is the ability to personalize selfies in real time and share them instantly with other users, a feature that has at once contributed to the app’s immense popularity (Snapchat boasts an estimated 166 million users daily) and raised privacy concerns among some of its customers. Snapchat’s rotating toolbox of image filters, called Lenses, enables users to manipulate photos and videos to humorous effect, as seen in these examples shared publicly on Instagram by celebrity Snapchatter Chrissy Teigen: Cute and innocent though it may appear, the feature has become the target of conspiracy theorists claiming that Snapchat’s corporate owner, Snap Inc., uses it to collect facial recognition data which it allegedly stores and shares with law enforcement agencies such as the FBI and CIA. We’ve found examples of such rumors dating back to Fall 2015 (soon after the Lenses feature was officially rolled out): < you guys are all swooning over the snapchat filters… And The FBI is getting the most extensive facial recognition library ever — TEENWOLF (@TEENWOLFREMIX) October 3, 2015 > It wasn’t until April of the following year that the rumors reached takeoff speed, however, thanks largely to a tweet composed by hip hop artist, songwriter, and unabashed flat-earth theorist B.o.B to his roughly two million followers: < when you realize all the snap chat filters are really building a facial recognition database ☕️? — B.o.B (@bobatl) April 16, 2016 > In May 2016, with civil cases already pending against Facebook and Google alleging unauthorized use of facial recognition technology, a class action lawsuit was filed by two Snapchat users in Illinois complaining that the app violated their rights under the state’s Biometric Information Privacy Act (BIPA) by failing to obtain adequate permission before gathering and storing their “biometric identifiers and biometric information”. The company flatly denied it: < Contrary to the claims of this frivolous lawsuit, we are very careful not to collect, store, or obtain any biometric information or identifiers about our community. > The class action suit was eventually dismissed in favor of arbitration in September 2016, but as of this writing the case remains unresolved. Crucial to Snapchat’s defense is their position, as stated in the Privacy Center of the company’s web site, that the app relies on object recognition, not facial recognition, to make Lenses work: < Have you ever wondered how Lenses make your eyes well up with tears or rainbows come out your mouth? Some of the magic behind Lenses is object recognition. Object recognition is an algorithm designed to understand the general nature of things that appear in an image. It lets us know that a nose is a nose or an eye is an eye. But object recognition isn’t the same as facial recognition. While Lenses can recognize faces in general, they can’t recognize a specific face. > If it’s true that Lenses can’t recognize (i.e., identify) specific faces, then the claim that the app produces anything qualifying as a “biometric identifier” under Illinois law is seriously in doubt. (The district judge in Illinois overseeing the Google facial recognition case previously defined “biometric identifier” as “a set of biology-based measurements … used to identify a person.”) As to the wider claim that Snapchat is building a “facial recognition database,” the distinction between object and facial recognition, at minimum, places a burden of proof on those trumpeting the claim to show that the app is capable of identifying specific faces in the first place. If this explanation (provided by the web site Vox) of how the software works is accurate, Snapchat doesn’t need to be able to identify specific faces to accomplish the task. It has to recognize a face as a face, and identify the parts of a face as the nose, eyes, ears, chin, etc., but it doesn’t have to recognize who the face belongs to: < Snapchat lets you capture what it’s like to live in the moment. On our end, that means that we automatically delete the content of your Snaps (the photo and video messages that you send your friends) from our servers after we detect that a Snap has been opened by all recipients or has expired. > And although the policy further acknowledges that Snap Inc. may share users’ personal information “to comply with any valid legal process, governmental request, or applicable law, rule, or regulation” (and transparency reports show that the company has indeed complied with such requests in the past), they can’t grant the FBI (or any other agency) access to a “facial recognition database” that doesn’t exist. Some rumors die hard, however. An updated variant that cropped up in early 2017 brought two new claims to the mix: one, that the FBI literally created Snapchat’s image filtering software (and alleged facial recognition database); and two, that there is a smoking gun to prove it — namely U.S. patent #9396354: The patent does exist (it was granted to Snapchat in July 2016), and it does describe an innovative use of facial recognition technology, but with respect to whether or not Snapchat’s image and video filters are a covert means of building a facial recognition database, it’s a red herring. According to an analysis by Sophos’ Naked Security blogger Alison Booth, the patent proposes using facial recognition software to identify individual subjects in photos, whereupon the latter would be modified and/or their distribution restricted in accordance with the subjects’ pre-established privacy settings. There is a catch. Implementation of the process would, of course, require amassing a facial recognition database. “For facial recognition to work,” writes Booth, “Snapchat would need to store images of all users that sign up to the feature — as a reference image to compare photos against.” So, there it is — a “facial recognition database” of the sort conspiracy theorists have been going on about since 2015, except that Snapchat has not, to date, implemented such a feature (a fact we were able to confirm with the company), nor is there evidence that the FBI (or any other law enforcement agency) was involved in creating it, nor does the patent itself mention sharing facial recognition data with government entities. Despite finding no legitimate basis for the claim that Snapchat is currently engaged in collecting, storing, or sharing facial recognition data on its users, we do not wish to downplay the increasing prevalence of facial recognition technology in both commercial and government applications, nor the privacy issues this raises. Sen. Al Franken (D-Minnesota) articulated some of these issues in a statement announcing the release of a 2015 Government Accountability Office (GAO) report on the privacy implications of the technology: < The newly released report raises serious concerns about how companies are collecting, using, and storing our most sensitive personal information. I believe that all Americans have a fundamental right to privacy, which is why it’s important that, at the very least, the tech industry adopts strong, industry-wide standards for facial recognition technology. But what we really need are federal standards that address facial recognition privacy by enhancing our consumer privacy framework. > The tech industry has yet to address these concerns to the satisfaction of consumer privacy watchdogs, however, nor has Congress made progress toward establishing the federal standards Franken called for. Thus far, issue has been dealt with primarily in the court system via cases such as the aforementioned BIPA class action lawsuits against Facebook and Google. One of the ironies of the false alarms about Snapchat’s alleged sharing of facial recognition data with the FBI is that the agency already maintains a biometric data network comprising the facial images of more than 117 million Americans (about half the U.S. adult population, and growing), mostly drawn from state DMV databases and other non-criminal sources. A 2016 report by the Georgetown Law Center for Privacy and Technology warned that the technology is both error-prone, with a disproportionate impact on communities of color, and almost totally unregulated. In testimony before a Senate Judiciary subcommittee hearing chaired by Sen. Franken in 2012, Electronic Frontier Foundation attorney Jennifer Lynch urged Congress to act sooner rather than later to protect the biometric privacy of all Americans: < Face recognition and its accompanying privacy concerns are not going away. Given this, it is imperative that government act now to limit unnecessary biometrics collection; instill proper protections on data collection, transfer, and search; ensure accountability; mandate independent oversight; require appropriate legal process before government collection; and define clear rules for data sharing at all levels. This is important to preserve the democratic and constitutional values that are bedrock to American society. >

Booth, Alison.  “Snapchat Turns Facial Recognition Technology on Its Head.”   Naked Security.  20 July 2016.;Danley-Greiner, Kristin.  “Spapchat Defends Procedures After Facial Recognition Class Action.”   Legal Newsline.  2 September 2016.;Garvie, Clare, Bedoya Alvaro, and Frankle, Jonathan.  “The Perpetual Line-up: Unregulated Police Face Recognition in America.”   Georgetown Law Center on Privacy & Technology.  18 October 2016.;Graham, Meg.  “Illinois Biometrics Lawsuits May Help Define Rules for Facebook, Google.”   Chicago Tribune.  13 January 2017.;Korte, Amy.  “Federal Court in Illinois Rules Biometric Privacy Lawsuit Against Google Can Proceed.”   Illinois Policy.  8 March 2017.;Maass, Dave.  “Memo to the DOJ: Facial Recognition’s Threat to Privacy Is Worse than Anyone Thought.”   Electronic Frontier Foundation.  18 October 2016.;Mathies, Daven.  “The Incredible Underlying Technology of Snapchat’s Selfie Lenses.”   Digital Trends.  1 July 2016.;Nelson, Steven.  “Half of U.S. Adults Are in Police Facial Recognition Networks.”   US News & World Report.  18 October 2016.;Roberts, Jeff John.  “Tech Industry’s Facial Recognition Plan Bashed by Privacy Groups.”   Fortune.  16 June 2016.;Thielman, Sam.  “FBI Using Vast Public Photo Data and Iffy Facial Recognition Tech to Find Criminals.”   The Guardian.  15 June 2016.;Trujillo, Mario.  “Facial Recognition Quietly Taking Hold.”   The Hill.  1 August 2015.;Welinder, Yana.  “EFF Urges Congress to Protect Privacy in Face Recognition.”   Electronic Frontier Foundation.  18 July 2012.;Yakowicz, Will.  “Snapchat Sued Under Illinois Biometric Information Usage Law.” Inc.  18 July 2016.;Electronic Frontier Foundation.  “Testimony of Jennifer Lynch to the Senate Committee on the Judiciary Subcommittee on Privacy, Technology, and the Law.”   18 July 2012.;Google.  “Patent: Apparatus and Method for Automated Privacy Protection in Distributed Images – US 9396354 B1.”   19 July 2016.;Government Accounting Office.  “Facial Recognition Technology: Commercial Uses, Privacy Issues, and Applicable Federal Law.”   20 June 2015.;U.S. Senate.  “Sen. Franken: New Report on Facial Recognition Technology Highlights Lack of Privacy Standards.”   30 July 2015.;U.S. Senate.  “Sen. Franken Releases Extensive Report Detailing Concerns with FBI Facial Recognition Program.”   15 June 2016.

three-square-market-microchip

three-square-market-microchip

In July 2017, Three Square Market announced it was offering employees the option of having a microchip implanted in their hands.

In July 2017, various news articles reported that a Wisconsin company Three Square Market would be offering its employees the opportunity to have a microchip implanted under their skin. On 24 July, Minnesota ABC affiliate KSTP reported: < A Wisconsin company is about to become the first in the U.S. to offer microchip implants to its employees. Yes, you read that right. Microchip implants. > The story went international, with the BBC, Daily Mail, RT, and Australia’s 9 News network all covering it. We have received several emails from readers wondering about the veracity of these articles. Three Square Market (also known as 32M), a company that specializes in  vending machines and office break room self-service software is indeed offering its employees the chance to have a microchip implanted in their hands. This basic fact is accurately captured in the various news reports that emerged on 24 and 25 July 2017. However, what must be emphasized, and what some articles do not specify in their headlines, is that the implantation is entirely optional for employees. A blog post on the company’s web site states: < Three Square Market (32M) is offering implanted chip technology to all employees. Company employees will have the option to voluntarily implant an RFID [radio frequency identification] microchip between the thumb and forefinger underneath the skin… The RFID chip will allow employees to make purchases in the company’s break room market, open doors, login to computers, use copy machines, among other things. > The RFID microchip uses the same near field communication technology (NFC) employed in contactless payment systems like Apple Pay. The company is also offering its workers a wristband with a RFID microchip attached to it, “for employees interested in the technology, but not the implant…” According to a company press release on 20 July 2017, the roughly 50 workers who are expected to opt for the microchip will have it implanted on 1 August 2017. Three Square Market’s CEO Todd Westby said he envisions the microchips being used for a variety of purposes at the company: < We foresee the use of RFID technology to drive everything from making purchases in our office break room market, opening doors, use of copy machines, logging into our office computers, unlocking phones, sharing business cards, storing medical/health information, and used as payment at other RFID terminals.  Eventually, this technology will become standardized, allowing you to use this as your passport, public transit, all purchasing opportunities, etc… > In its blog post, the company said that the microchip does not have GPS (Global Positioning System) capabilities and is not trackable. In 2015, the Stockholm, Sweden office complex Epicenter began offering RFID microchip implants to the employees of companies based there, but we could find no news report or public announcement of any United States company doing so prior to July 2017, suggesting Three Square Market really is the first in the country to try it. Biohax, the Swedish company behind that initiative, is also working with Three Square Market on their microchip implants.

Rosenthal, Josh.  “Wisconsin Company to Implant Microchips in Employees.”  KSTP.  24 July 2017.;BBC News.  “Wisconsin Company Three Square Market to Microchip Employees.”  BBC.com.  24 July 2017.;Edwards, Valerie.  “Wisconsin Company Announces it Will Be Installing Microchips in Their Employees – but Insists There’s No GPS Tracking.”  Daily Mail.  23 July 2017.;RT.  “Handy Way to Pay: US Firm Plans to Fit Employees With Microchip Implants.”  RT.com.  23 July 2017.;9News.  “American Company Microchips Employees With Device the Size of a Grain of Rice.”  9News.com.au.  24 July 2017.;Cellan-Jones, Rory.  “Office Puts Chips Under Staff’s Skin.”  BBC.com.  29 January 2015.

prayer-darkhorse-battalion

prayer-darkhorse-battalion

Inboxer Rebellion

David Mikkelson

Prayers are requested for the Darkhorse Marine battalion fighting in Afghanistan.

A simple prayer request for the Darkhorse Marine battalion fighting in Afghanistan was initially spread via social media in late 2010: < We are asking everyone to say a prayer for “Darkhorse” 3rd Battalion 5th Marines and their families. They are fighting it out in Afghanistan and have lost 9 marines in 4 days. Please repost this. > Even more than indicated in that Facebook-circulated prayer request, the U.S. 3rd Battalion,  5th Marines (Darkhorse) suffered heavy personnel losses in Afghanistan between October 2010 and its return to Camp Pendleton in April 2011. According to the San Diego  Union-Tribune, thirteen members of the battalion were killed in the October/November 2010 timeframe: < An infantryman from Camp Pendleton’s 3rd Battalion, 5th Marine Regiment was killed in action in Afghanistan, the Pentagon announced [on 8 November 2010]. Lance Cpl. Randy R. Braggs, 21, of Sierra Vista, Ariz., died Nov. 6 while conducting combat operations in Helmand province, the Department of Defense said. Braggs was the 13th member of 3/5 killed since the battalion moved into the Sangin area of northeastern Helmand province in October, including four felled in a single bomb attack on their mine-resistant all terrain vehicle. Two other Marines were fatally shot at a patrol base last week in Sangin, the Marines said. Initial reports indicate they were attacked by a rogue Afghan soldier who then fled, according to U.S. and NATO officials in Afghanistan. An investigation into the incident is continuing. > As noted in an Associated Press account, the area of Afghanistan in which the 3/5 operated is regarded as a particularly key (and violent) area of that country: < U.S. Marines who recently inherited this lush river valley in southern Helmand province from British forces have tossed aside their predecessor’s playbook in favor of a more aggressive strategy to tame one of the most violent places in Afghanistan. U.S. commanders say success is critical in Sangin district — where British forces suffered nearly one-third of their deaths in the war — because it is the last remaining sanctuary in Helmand where the Taliban can freely process the opium and heroin that largely fund the insurgency. The district also serves as a key crossroads to funnel drugs, weapons and fighters throughout Helmand and into neighboring Kandahar province, the spiritual heartland of the Taliban and the most important battleground for coalition forces. The U.S.-led coalition hopes its offensive in the south will kill or capture key Taliban commanders, rout militants from their strongholds and break the insurgency’s back. That will allow the coalition and the Afghans to improve government services, bring new development and a sense of security. > Another Associated Press report from November 2010 described the difficulty (and heavy casualties) the Marines were encountering during operations in that region of Afghanistan: < The Marines patrolling through the green fields and tall mud compounds of Helmand province’s Sangin district say they are literally in a race for their lives. They are trying to adjust their tactics to outwit Taliban fighters, who have killed more coalition troops here than in any other Afghan district this year. “As a new unit coming in, you are at a distinct disadvantage because the Taliban have been fighting here for years, have established fighting positions and have laid the ground with a ton of IEDs,” said Lt. Col. Jason Morris, commander of the 3rd Battalion,  5th Marine Regiment. “You have to evolve quickly because you have no other choice.” Many of the younger Marines also have had to cope for the first time with seeing their best friends die or suffer grievous wounds. Fifteen Marines have been killed and about 50 wounded since the battalion arrived in October [2010] — many by improvised explosive devices or IEDs. > Between 8 October 2010 and its April 2011 return home, the 3/5 lost 24 Marines while conducting Operation Enduring Freedom combat operations in Helmand province:

Abbot, Sebastian.  “US Takes on Violent Afghan Valley That Bled Brits.”   The Seattle Times.  9 November 2010.;Kovach, Gretel C.  “Sangin Losses Mount for Camp Pendleton Battalion.”   San Diego Union-Tribune.  8 November 2010.;Associated Press.  “Marines Learn Lessons from Tragedy In Afghanistan.”   NPR.  12 November 2010.;Los Angeles Times.  “Marines From the Dark Horse Battalion Return Home to Camp Pendleton .”   11 April 2011.;San Diego Union-Tribune.  “Pendleton’s 3/5 Battalion Loses Another Marine.”   29 December 2010.

native-americans-airplane-arrows

native-americans-airplane-arrows

Photograph shows an airplane shot down by Native Americans using wooden arrows.

A photograph purportedly showing an airplane with dozens of wooden arrows stuck into its underside is frequently shared online, accompanied by one of a number of fabricated backstories: < Someone sent me this as the natives are protesting all the pipelines being built. Greenpeace supplied all the arrows since they are more environmentally friendly than bullets. > In April 2014, the web site Fellowship of the Minds shared the same image along with test holding that it depicted President Obama’s plane after he undertook a flight over a reservation in Oklahoma: < Obama took a private plane flight over an Indian reservation in Oklahoma. This is what happened … > This photograph does not show a plane that was attacked by Native Americans. Rather, it captures an installation that was created by the art collective Los Carpinteros. The piece, entitled Avião (Plane), was displayed at the Faena Art Center in Buenos Aires, Argentina in May 2012: < The exhibition presented in the Molinos Room at the Faena Arts Center consists of the works Avião (Plane), El Barrio (The Neighbourhood) and the site specific instillation Alumbrado Público (Street Lighting). These three works, realized with completely different techniques, are unified by the same question: how far is it good to be civilized? Through an economy of improvisation and precariousness, the artist’s work utilizes industrial objects to ironically challenge the notions of civilization and the mechanisms of perception by juxtaposing affluent western society against a rationed society with minimal consumption. An imposing Piper Comanche aircraft pierced by wooden arrows makes up Avião, a large-scale installation alluding to the development and conquest of space, and symbolizing the cultural shock caused by technological progress in various different civilizations. >

Stolz, George.  “Los Carpinteros: Seeing Double.”   Art News.  24 June 2013.;Hosmer, Katie.  “Hundreds of Wooden Arrows Pierce Airplane from Below.”   My Modern Met.  24 June 2013.

The federal government, either through the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) or the 2006 PETS law allows pet owners to bring their pets to any hotel or motel during weather-related evacuations.

MOSTLY FALSE

In late August and early September 2017, Hurricanes Harvey and Irma prompted social media claims that the federal government, either through a 2006 law or the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) mandated that pets be allowed to accompany disaster evacuees into hotels and motels. A typical claim read: < FLORIDA FRIENDS WITH PETS: ATTENTION: If you are evacuating to a hotel/motel and they say they DON’T accept pets, don’t get ugly, but simply tell them that is against the law & FEMA established that after Hurricane Katrina! The Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act (PETS) was a bi-partisan initiative in the United States House of Representatives to require states seeking Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) assistance to accommodate pets and service animals in their plans for evacuating residents facing disasters. DONT SHARE, COPY AND PASTE SO MORE PEOPLE READ THIS!” > The 2006 Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006 essentially mandates that FEMA take into account the needs of pet owners when developing disaster preparedness plans. It also authorizes the director of the agency to fund emergency shelter facilities for pets. It makes no mention of hotels or motels. The summary on Congress.gov reads: < Pets Evacuation and Transportation Standards Act of 2006 – Amends the Robert T. Stafford Disaster Relief and Emergency Assistance Act to require the Director of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) to ensure that state and local emergency preparedness operational plans address the needs of individuals with household pets and service animals prior to, during, and following a major disaster or emergency. Authorizes the Director to: (1) study and develop plans that take into account the needs of individuals with pets and service animals prior to, during, and following a major disaster or emergency; and (2) make financial contributions, on the basis of programs or projects approved by the Director, to the states and local authorities for animal emergency preparedness purposes, including the procurement, construction, leasing, or renovating of emergency shelter facilities and materials that will accommodate people with pets and service animals. Authorizes federal agencies to provide, as assistance essential to meeting threats to life and property resulting from a major disaster, rescue, care, shelter, and essential needs to individuals with household pets and service animals and to such pets and animals. > In preparation for Tropical Storm Irene in 2011, FEMA advised pet owners to “locate several ‘pet-friendly’ hotels.” It made no mention of a requirement for hotels to accommodate pets: <  Planning for animal evacuation: If you must leave your residence, have a plan for your family pets; Go online and locate several “pet-friendly” hotels in and out of your area; Identify friends or relatives outside your area where you and your pets can stay; If there is a disaster pending, evacuate early with your pets, working animals and livestock; don’t wait for a mandatory evacuation order; and Animals should have leg bands or tattoos, microchips or identification tags with their name as well as your address and phone number. > FEMA’s other guides for pet owners, also make no mention of the purported requirement. As of press time, FEMA’s “Rumor Control” page, makes no mention of the rumor.  We reached out to the agency for comment, but have not yet received a response. However, disabled people who use service animals do have the law on their side when they check in to a hotel. The Americans with Disabilities Act (ADA) makes service animals legally exempt from any hotel “pet policies” Bottom line: there is no law that requires hotels to accommodate household pets during a natural disaster. Pet owners should plan accordingly.Â

Pohlid, Kathleen.  “New Regulations On Service Animals In The Hotel Industry.”   Hotel Business Review.  Accessed 7 September 2017.;Worgull, Samantha.  “How To Handle Service Animals At Hotels.”   Hotel News Now.  4 August 2014.;FEMA.  “Before A Disaster: Plan For Your Pets.”   Accessed 7 September 2017.;FEMA.  “Prepare For Emergencies Now: Information For Pet Owners.”   Accessed 7 September 2017.;FEMA.  “Facilitator Guide: Pet/Service Animal Preparedness.”   Accessed 7 September 2017.;109th Congress.  “H.R.3858, Pets Evacuation And Transportation Standards Act Of 2006.”   6 October 2006.;U.S. Department of Justice Civil Rights Division: Disability Rights Section.  “Commonly Asked Questions About Service Animals In Places Of Business.”   July 1996.;FEMA.  “FEMA Advises Disaster Applicants To Beware Of Rumors, Misinformation, And Fraud.”   31 August 2017.;FEMA.  “Hurricane Harvey Rumor Control.”   Accessed 7 September 2017.;AVMA.  “PETS Act (FAQ).”   Accessed 7 September 2017.

tornado-carries-mobile-home

tornado-carries-mobile-home

A tornado carried a mobile home for 130 miles and left its occupants unharmed.

A purported news article reporting that a tornado carried a mobile home for 130 miles from Oklahoma to Kansas, leaving the occupying family (one of whom was amusingly named “Dorothy”) unharmed, was circulated on social media in August 2016: This article was originally published by World News Daily Report (WNDR) in May 2015, and opened as follows: < A family from Tulsa, Oklahoma, underwent the scariest experience of their life yesterday, when their mobile home was carried over 130 miles by a tornado, landing in a rural Kansas area. Five members of the same family were inside the building during its “flight”, and all of them have miraculously survived without injuries. 41-year old Dorothy Williams, was at home with her husband, her son, and her two brothers, when their mobile home was lifted off the ground by an F4 tornado. > While the World News Daily Report article featured real photographs of tornado damage, the accompanying story about a mobile home being carried for over 130 miles was a fabricated one. The World News Daily Report web site is a well-known purveyor of fake news and states in its disclaimer that all of the site’s content is of “fictional nature”: < WNDR assumes however all responsibility for the satirical nature of its articles and for the fictional nature of their content. All characters appearing in the articles in this website – even those based on real people –  are entirely fictional and any resemblance between them and any persons, living, dead, or undead is purely a miracle. >

dry-drowning-death

dry-drowning-death

Account of a 10-year-old boy's death explains dry drowning and its symptoms.

The following item was the text of an article titled “Boy’s death highlights a hidden danger: Dry drowning” that was posted to the TodayShow.com site on 5 June 2008 and circulated widely online: < The tragic death of a South Carolina 10-year-old more than an hour after he had gone swimming has focused a spotlight on the little-known phenomenon called “dry drowning” – and warning signs that every parent should be aware of. “I’ve never known a child could walk around, talk, speak and their lungs be filled with water,” Cassandra Jackson told NBC News in a story broadcast Thursday on TODAY. On Sunday, Jackson had taken her son, Johnny, to a pool near their home in Goose Creek, S.C. It was the first time he’d ever gone swimming — and, tragically, it would be his last. [Rest of article here.] > Although the account is essentially true, the article contains some confusing elements that could send parents scuttling to protect their children from one danger when they should be trying to guard them against a quite different one. A 10-year-old boy named Johnny (“Jon Jon”) Jackson died as described above on 1 June 2008 in Goose Creek, South Carolina, subsequent to swimming in the pool at the apartment complex where he lived. Although Johnny, a child who lived with autism and attention deficit disorder, was wearing flotation devices on his arms and was being monitored by his mother during his time in the pool, he did inhale some water while swimming; his mother described him as “taking a little bit of water in and coughing and then calming down.” He afterwards appeared fine, but less than two hours after leaving the pool he twice defecated in his pants and complained of being tired. After being bathed and dressing himself back at the apartment, the boy walked to his bed unaided, leaving his mother to believe he was simply worn out. Yet when his mother checked on Johnny a few minutes later, she discovered that white foam was issuing from his mouth, his lips were blue, and his tongue was sticking out. The family called 911, but the Johnny suffered cardiac arrest during transport to the hospital and was pronounced dead on arrival at Trident Medical Center. According to the coroner, water was found in Johnny’s lungs, and the cause of his death was listed as asphyxiation by drowning. While the article about Johnny’s death is factual, it contains one key element of confusion: Jon Jon Jackson was not technically a “dry drowning” victim, but rather a victim of “delayed drowning,” also termed “secondary drowning.” That distinction is important because numerous news articles that mentioned Johnny’s death and attributed it to dry drowning also supplied the information that dry drowning is responsible for ten to fifteen percent of all drowning deaths, thereby making it seem as though the tragic circumstances that swept away this one particular child loom as a huge risk to other children. This is not the case: The incidence of delayed drowning (which is what killed Johnny) is relatively uncommon; the incidence of true dry drowning is much greater. The latter is therefore what adult swimmers and the parents of juvenile swimmers need be more concerned about, but that form of drowning was not truly described in the article about Johnny’s death. Many news stories, by the way, indicate they drew the “ten to fifteen percent” figure from the Centers for Disease Control. The CDC denies this, distancing itself from that particular factoid with this statement: < UPDATE: Recent media reports have incorrectly attributed to CDC data about incidents of “dry drowning.” CDC supports international consensus defining drowning as “the process of experiencing respiratory impairment from submersion/immersion in liquid” and does not distinguish between “wet” and “dry” drowning. > The primary difference between dry drowning and secondary (or delayed) drowning is the presence or absence of water in the victim’s lungs. In Jon Jon Jackson’s case, he died with water in his lungs, so his death was more typical of “ordinary” drowning victims (i.e., water in the lungs prevented those organs from transporting oxygen into the bloodstream) even though he lived for a couple of hours after leaving the pool. By contrast, true dry drowning deaths do not involve the presence of liquid in the lungs. There are two primary theories as to what causes dry drowning, and it may well be that both are correct and that this form of death can be brought on in two different ways. The first theory is that a sudden rush of water into the throat causes the airway to snap shut, a condition known as a laryngospasm. During this event, although no water enters the lungs, no air enters either, so the victim dies of asphyxiation. The second explanation posits that the shock of a swimmer’s suddenly entering extremely cold water causes the heart to stop. Dry drowning accounts for ten to fifteen percent of all drowning deaths. Considering that approximately 4,000 people drown in the U.S. each year, that means dry drowning kills about 400 to 600 U.S. victims annually. It therefore poses a significant enough mortality risk that those who swim (or who supervise swimmers) should know what can be done to decrease the chance of its happening to them or their loved ones. To help prevent dry drowning, keep your mouth closed when jumping or diving into water, thereby protecting the larynx from a sudden inrush of water that could cause it to spasm and cut off the airway. Also, do not dive or jump into extremely cold water; instead enter cold water gradually. Those who have a history of heart problems should avoid entering very cold water at all, even if they plan to go slowly. Drowning is the second most common cause of death in children in the United States. In addition to following the more usual cautions (e.g., watch them like hawks all the time), caregivers of young swimmers should try to head off dry drowning by training their charges to keep their mouths closed when jumping into water and to enter very cold water slowly. Caregivers should also guard against delayed drowning by monitoring very closely any child who has come out of the water coughing and sputtering (signs of water having been breathed in), especially keeping an eye out for any further difficulties in breathing, extreme tiredness, or marked changes in behavior, all of which are signs that a swimmer may have inhaled a dangerous amount of fluid. Should such difficulties be noted in a swimmer, that person should be taken promptly to an emergency room for medical observation and, if necessary, intervention. One additional caution should be noted regarding drowning: It is a fallacy that those who lose their lives in such fashion will flail about wildly even as they are slipping beneath the water’s surface. Drowning generally occurs silently and smoothly, the victim quietly passing away wholly unnoticed as friends or family chatter nearby. Therefore, never mistake a lack of commotion for a sign that everything is all right; instead, keep your eyes on those you are supposed to be watching rather than trust that they will do or shout something to alert you if anything goes awry. Forget about trusting that old saw about drowners’ going down three times: they go down once, and they stay down.

Celizic, Mike.  “Boy’s Death Highlights a Hidden Danger: Dry Drowning.”   TodayShow.com.  5 June 2008.;Chew, Kristina.  “Boy Dies During Nap, Possibly from Secondary Drowning.”   Autism Vox.  5 June 2008.;Parks, Nadine.  “Boy’s Death Mystifies Mother.”   The [Charleston] Post and Courier.  4 June 2008  (p. B1).;Buffington, Brett.  “Texas Boy Dies from ‘Dry Drowning’ Days After Swimming.”   KHOU-TV [Houston].  8 June 2017.

crisis-text-line-741741

crisis-text-line-741741

Inboxer Rebellion

Teens can text 741741 from anywhere to talk with a crisis counselor.

In September 2015, an image began circulating via social media, stating that teens could text 741741 in order to speak with a crisis counselor: Nonetheless, 741741 is indeed the number for the Crisis Text Hotline — though the hotline is only available in the United States, not anywhere in the world. Although the image specified “teens,” the number is available to anyone in crisis: < Q: HOW DOES CRISIS TEXT LINE WORK? You text 741741 when in crisis. Anywhere, anytime. A live, trained crisis counselor receives the text and responds quickly. The crisis counselor helps you move from a hot moment to a cool calm to stay safe and healthy using effective active listening and suggested referrals – all through text message using CTL’s secure platform. Q: WHO SHOULD TEXT IN? A: We exist to help anyone in crisis any time. > The Crisis Text Hotline also notes in their FAQ that all text messages are anonymous and free, although charges may apply with carriers other than AT&T, T-Mobile, Sprint, or Verizon. In a June 2015 article published by the Chicago Tribune, Nancy Lublin, the CEO of DoSomething.org, explained why she founded the Crisis Text Line: < The text message to a DoSomething.org staffer read: “He won’t stop raping me. He told me not to tell anyone.” Those words quickly made their way to Nancy Lublin, the CEO of the New York City-based youth empowerment group, which runs do-good campaigns by text, like initiatives for gender-neutral bathrooms and sharing tips to prevent texting while driving. Lublin’s staff had received a few messages — concerns about bullying and the like — unrelated to their campaigns, but “that one message stopped me in my tracks,” Lublin said. “It was like being punched in the stomach. The first rule of marketing and sales is: Go where demand is. People want this by text. We should be supplying crisis counseling by text.” That week, Lublin started building Crisis Text Line, a national 24/7 text number — 741741 — available to everyone but mostly used by teens. It went live two years later in 2013 in Chicago and El Paso, Texas. Chicago was chosen because of the influence of an early funder, the Chicago-based MacArthur Foundation. El Paso was a data-driven decision based on its large Latino population. Within four months, the line had been contacted by cellphones from every area code in America. The organization is expected to surpass 7 million messages by July, and Lublin is now in need of more counselors. >

nasa-data-global-warming

nasa-data-global-warming

A recent hiatus in sea level rise conflicts with the scientific consensus regarding global warming.

On 26 July 2017, supplement and paranoia peddling website NaturalNews.com made a sweeping conclusion about climate change based on a portion of a single chart they found. The post, by Mike “Health Ranger” Adams, uses a time series of satellite sea level data from the National Aeronautics and Space Administration to argue that climate change is no big deal and that the “mainstream media” is ignoring data that proves him right: < NASA’s own data reveal that world-wide ocean levels have been falling for nearly two years, dropping from a variation of roughly 87.5mm to below 85mm. These data, of course, clearly contradict the false narrative of rapid, never-ending rising ocean levels that flood continents and drown cities — a key element of the climate change “boogeyman” fiction that’s used to scare gullible youth into making Al Gore rich. > To “prove” this, Adams points to NASA’s satellite altimetry data — used by scientists to precisely measure global average sea level change since 1993 — which he says busts the whole global warming thing wide open, despite its fairly unambiguous long-term upward trend:  The region of the chart — around the last two years of the record — that allegedly proves global warming is a lie is highlighted above. It shows a period of generally flat sea level rise. Astute chart readers, however, may note that there have been a number of times throughout the record in which sea level rise has been flat, or even briefly reversed, before continuing the more dominant rising trend. According to University of New South Wales climatologist and sea level expert John Church, this is the reason the “media” is “silent” on the issue; in fact, it is in no way newsworthy: < The short term fall over the last year or so reported on the Natural News website is nothing out of the ordinary and in fact the fall seems less than several previous examples of sea level fall, such as [the drop documented in 2010-2011]. It does not seem to be a particularly noteworthy event. > To understand why the event is not noteworthy, one needs to understand both the short- and long-term drivers of sea level change. From a long-term global perspective, there are two primary drivers of sea level rise: the first is the balance between water trapped in ice and water contained within the ocean itself. Simply put, when ice that is trapped on land melts, it increases the volume of water in the ocean, causing sea level to rise. The second major driver is known as thermal expansion — when water gets warmer it expands, increasing its volume. Research suggests that these two contributors alone explain 75 percent of the observed sea level rise since 1971. These larger trends, however, can be dampened (or enhanced) by shorter term weather patterns. The most important factors to consider on this time-scale are the El Niño-La Niña cycle (which affects both water temperature, as well as evaporation and precipitation of moisture) and the hydrological issues associated with where rainwater falls on land. The best illustration of these factors combining to alter the overall trend of sea level rise is the 2010-2011 drop in sea level mentioned above. In this instance, the confluence of La Niña and a number of other atmospheric circulation patterns forced an anomalously large amount of rain to fall over the uniquely bowl-shaped continent of Australia, as described by Scientific American: < In most cases, though, water that falls on land eventually drains into the ocean. Even if a whole lot of rain fell in South America’s Amazon, for example, it could slow sea-level rise for only about a couple of months, as it slowly made its way to the sea. So in order to make sea levels fall, the water had to be stored in a place where it didn’t reach the ocean for a long while. That place, it turns out, was Australia. […] Lake Eyre is the lowest point in Australia. It’s usually a dry, salty flat. But when it rains heavily, the basin fills, and the lake teems with new life, as long-dormant seeds spring to life and birds flock to the lake. From 2010 to 2011, enough rain fell on Australia to fill the lower part of the lake almost completely, and the upper portion at least 75 percent. Australia got about a foot of rain more than normal over that period, said [National Center for Atmospheric Research scientist John] Fasullo. The continent stored that excess water for long enough to change global sea levels. That the world’s smallest continent can affect global sea levels this way is pretty extraordinary, said Fasullo. It’s also rare. […] In addition to La Niña, other climate variations also played a role. Together, they forced the extraordinary rainfall and water storage in the Australian continent. > Eventually, of course, this water evaporates and returns to the ocean, where it joins the expanding and increasing global ocean reservoir. We spoke to Fasullo — the lead author on the study that documented the cause of the 2010-2011 drop in sea level — about this current hiatus, and he told us it in no way conflicts with our understanding of the connection between global warming and sea level rise: < Of course, this leveling does not conflict with our understanding of sea level rise and its main drivers. It is well known for example that sea level falls (in an anomalous sense) at the end of an El Niño due to drought subsiding over many tropical land areas such as the Amazon (water moves from the ocean to land surface) and heat being released from the ocean (as the tropical upper Pacific Ocean releases heat to the atmosphere, causing contraction). [The] recent leveling of sea level rise comes on the heels of an unprecedented rate of rise during the four years that preceded it (2011-14). In addition to global warming, this rise was also strongly influenced by the El Niño-La Niña cycle and so it too should not be oversold. > Ultimately, the story published by Adams attempts to disguise a weather as a climatological trend, University of California, Santa Cruz Climatologist Gary Griggs told us: < One or two or three years of weather means very little in the long-term record of sea-level rise just as it would have very little meaning for global temperature records. Due to a variety of atmospheric circulation patterns and variations, temperatures vary from year to year as does rainfall, etc., the recent 4 year drought in the west is a good example. > Using two years of data to make sweeping claims about trends in the global climate system, especially when such fluctuations are known and understood by science, is misleading and inaccurate, and as such we rank this claim as false.

Adams, Mike.  “NASA Confirms: Sea Levels Have Been Falling Across the Planet for Two Years … Media Silent.”   Natural News.  26 July 2017.;NASA.  “Understanding Sea Level”   Accessed 1 August 2017.;IPCC.  “Climate Change 2014: Synthesis Report. Contribution of Working Groups I, II and III to the Fifth Assessment Report of the Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change [Core Writing Team, R.K. Pachauri and L.A. Meyer (eds.)]”   2014 (Chapter 13).;Boening, Carmen, et al.  “The 2011 La Niña: So Strong, the Oceans Fell.”   Geophysical Research Letters.  4 October 2012. Ogburn, Stephanie Page.  “A Scientist Explains the Mystery of Recent Sea-Level Drop.”   Scientific American.  20 August 2013.

was-a-black-nhl-player-fired-for-raising-his-fist-during-the-national-anthem

was-a-black-nhl-player-fired-for-raising-his-fist-during-the-national-anthem

The Tampa Bay Lightning fired J.T. Brown for raising his fist in protest during the national anthem.

On 9 October 2017, the “satirical” web site Freedum Junkshun published a story claiming that professional hockey player J.T. Brown was fired from the Tampa Bay Lighting after engaging in a silent demonstration against extrajudicial killings by police. The story was quickly recycled verbatim by similarly disreputable sites that try to pass themselves off as legitimate. As the national anthem played prior to the Lightning’s game against the Florida Panthers on 7 October 2017, Brown raised his fist, evoking the protest carried out by Tommie Smith and John Carlos during the 1968 Summer Olympics. Freedum Junkshun fabricated a quote from the team’s “owner,” Burt Lancaster: < We wish Mr. Brown the best, but we feel that he does not embody the values of the Tampa Bay Lightning. We support our country, we support our troops, we support our police, and we support our President. > The Lightning’s actual owner is Jeff Vinik, who bought the team in 2010. The actor Burt Lancaster died on 20 October 1994. In reality, the Lightning released a statement supporting Brown: < The Tampa Bay Lightning celebrate the moment before every game when we can unite as a community, paying homage to a flag that is representative of our nation and those who have sacrificed. At the same time, we respect our players and individual choices they may make on social and political issues. > The fake quote is in line with Freedom Junkshun’s “satirical” motus operandi. The site also contains a disclaimer: < We believe that there is nothing more precious than the mind of an aging conservative. Here we gather a boatload of bullhonkey, works of pure satirical fiction, to give the fist-shakers of the world a reason to hate. Reality is often in the eye of the beholder. You won’t find any of it here. Join the fun in the comments on our Facebook page where you too can watch David Hasselhoff running over someone’s poodle magically transformed into a crime against humanity by Barack Obama or yet another murder the Clintons got away with. > However, the story was republished by at least three other sites — Conservative7, Defense Patriot, and American News — that do not carry similar disclaimers. Brown first made the gesture prior to a pre-season game on 28 September 2017. After the Panthers game, he explained in a statement that his protest was not about showing disrespect toward the U.S. flag or its military forces: < It is about police brutality, racial injustice, and inequality in this country. It is something that I as well as many others feel needs to be addressed. I love my country, but that doesn’t mean I cannot acknowledge that it is not perfect. In my life, I have been through more than my fair share of racism both on and off the ice. There comes a time when you cannot remain silent, hoping and wishing for a change. It takes much more. > Brown also said that he had been hit with “racist remarks and death threats” on his Twitter account because of the protest. He has not repeated the protest since the Panthers game, and instead says he is working with the Tampa Police Department and community organizations that aim to foster better relationships between police and communities. Brown also took part in a simulation with the Tampa Police Department’s Citizens Police Academy in which he played the role of an officer. Interim Police Chief Brian Dugan said after meeting with Brown: < It’s a credit to J.T. He could have just raised his fist and spewed some stuff in the paper and not really acted on it. He’s probably going to do a ride-along with us in the streets when he can. >

Brown, DeNeen L. “They didn’t #TakeTheKnee: The Black Power protest salute that shook the world in 1968.” Washington Post. 24 September 2017.;Reuters. “Lightning’s Brown Raises Fist During National Anthem.” 7 October 2017.;ESPN. “Lightning’s J.T. Brown Gets Death Threats After Protest.” 9 October 2017.;Gross, Lila. “VIDEO: Lightning’s J.T. Brown Trains With Tampa PD After Anthem Protest.” WFLA-TV. 16 October 2017.;Smith, Joe. “Lightning’s J.T. Brown Spent Day with Tampa Police. Here’s What hHappened.” Tampa Bay Times. 15 October 2017.;ESPN. “Lightning’s J.T. Brown Getting Involved After Anthem Protest.” 18 October 2017.

trump-subscription-box

trump-subscription-box

In May 2017 President Trump launched a monthly "Big League Box" subscription for campaign merchandise.

On 29 May 2017, reporters tweeted screenshots of e-mails they received from President Trump’s mailing list, inviting recipients to take advantage of a subscription called the “Big League Box”: < The Trump campaign is taking the @birchbox subscription approach, introducing the “big league box” pic.twitter.com/41zUCxAlYA — Betsy Klein (@betsy_klein) May 29, 2017 > Not everyone was convinced the boxes were legitimate: < IT SCARES ME TOO but fortunately its a joke and not real (i googled big league boxes trump and it took me to that tweet) — Nosh (@qqnosh) May 29, 2017 > < President Donald Trump will reportedly take a page from the subscription box business model with his own monthly box full of stuff people probably don’t want. As CNN reporter Betsy Klein tweeted Monday, the Trump Make America Great Again Committee will offer “Big League Boxes,” packed with “exclusive and vintage” (read: old) Trump merchandise and delivered monthly to recurring donors’ doors. > Missing from all the articles was a link to the purported “Big League Boxes” subscription signup page, and Trump’s web site’s “News” section made no mention of the endeavor. However, we managed to track down the original link: < Get your Big League Box! Every month as a recurring donor – you will receive a handpicked bundle of exclusive and vintage OFFICIAL Donald J. Trump merchandise. There’s a limited number of subscriptions available due to supplies. Get your first Big League Box delivered before June 30th [2017] with a recurring contribution of just $49 or more today. > It is true that the web site offers “OFFICIAL Donald J. Trump merchandise” in monthly “Big League Boxes” in exchange for a “recurring contribution of just $49 or more.” (Some versions of the e-mail reportedly asked for “$69 or more.”) As of 31 May 2017, no one had reported purchasing or receiving the boxes to describe its contents, but the link and advertisement (archived above) are real.

Jones, Isabel.  “Donald Trump Rolls Out His Own Monthly Subscription Box—And We Have Questions.”   InStyle.  30 May 2017.;Vitto, Laura.  “Donald Trump Is Selling A Subscription Box No One Asked For.”   Mashable.  30 May 2017.;DonaldJTrump.com.  “Get your Big League Box!”   Accessed 31 May 2017.;DonaldJTrump.com.  “News.”   Accessed 31 May 2017.

act-like-youve-been-there-before

act-like-youve-been-there-before

Penn State's Joe Paterno said "when you get into the end zone, act like you've been there before."

In July 2017, an old, recycled quote went viral after White House communications director Anthony Scaramucci attributed the phrase “act like you’ve been there before” to former Penn State coach Joe Paterno: < “On the honor of the job. Remember Joe Paterno? What would he say? ‘Act like you’ve been there before.’ Act with honor and dignity and respect and hold the confidence of the presidency.” > The full quote is commonly rendered as a football analogy: “When you get into the end zone, act like you’ve been there before.” Many people criticized Scaramucci for using Paterno — whose career was tarnished after a lengthy child sexual abuse scandal — as an example of honor, but others took issue with the attribution of this quote. Did Joe Paterno really say “act like you’ve been there before?” Wasn’t it Vince Lombardi? No, it was Tom Landry. Or maybe it was Paul Brown, Lou Holt, or Paul William “Bear” Bryant?  Our research turned up a variety of credible sources that attributed this phrase to a wide range of coaches. Jack Ham, for instance, a Pittsburgh Steelers player who spent his college years playing for Paterno at Penn State, wrote in the forward to the book “An Odd Steelers Journey” that Paterno had once used the phrase: < Andy read the play and close the off tackle, making the running back bounce to the outside, and yet he was still able to make the tackle. All of that and he made it look easy. No big deal. He helped the running back get up and went back to the huddle. Business as usual. As Joe Paterno would say, “Act like you’ve been there before.” > The New York Times quoted Hall of Famer Lou Holtz using a similar phrase in a 1986 article, and former Cleveland Browns coach Paul Brown in 1991. As this quote apparently sums up the general attitude that coaches have toward end zone celebrations, it has probably been spoken by hundreds of different coaches (including Paterno) at one time or another: < Many football coaches have a simple opinion on how a player should act when he arrives in the end zone to score a touchdown. Famous former coaches Darrell Royal (University of Texas), Vince Lombardi (Green Bay Packers), Paul Brown (Cleveland Browns), and Tom Landry (Dallas Cowboys) are among those who have been credited with saying, “Act like you’ve been there before.” > But who said it first? Although we have yet to find a definitive answer, the Washington Post attributed this quote to Vince Lombardi in 1967: < It is hard to imagine Lombardi not fuming at the sight of a mediocre defensive lineman dancing with self-celebratory delight after making a routine tackle in the second quarter with the team trailing by 14 points. One of the many sayings attributed to him (it had also been put in the mouth of fellow coaching legend Paul Brown) is something that he supposedly said to the great kick returner Travis Williams in 1967 when Williams danced after scoring a touchdown: “Travis, the next time you make it to the end zone, act like you’ve been there before.” As the story goes, that was all that needed to be said. >

Maraniss, David.  “How Would the Legend Do Now?”   Washington Post.  27 January 2000.;Robinson, Tom.  “Sportsmanship in Youth Athletics.”   ABDO Publishing Company.  1 September 2010.;Berkow, Ira.  “Sports of The Times; At One Time, Paul Brown Jumped for Joy, Too.”   New York Times.  7 August 1991.;Rogers, Thomas.  “Sports World Specials; Noteworthy Holtz.”   New York Times.  16 June 1986.;Russell, Andy.  “An Odd Steelers Journey.”   Sports Publishing LLC.  2002.

"mitch" AND "mcconnell" AND "polio" AND "government" AND "healthcare"

mitch-mcconnell-polio-government-healthcare

mitch-mcconnell-polio-government-healthcare

The U.S. government funded Mitch McConnell's care and rehabilitation when he had polio as a child.

On 22 June 2017, the Occupy Democrats Facebook page posted a meme claiming that the United States government paid for Mitch McConnell’s care and rehabilitation when the Republican senior senator contracted polio as an infant in the 1940s. This claim is contrasted, in the meme, with McConnell’s support for the Senate Republican health care plan published that day: < As a kid, Mitch McConnell had polio, and the government paid for ALL of his care and rehabilitation. Now, as the leader of the Republicans in the Senate, McConnell is taking government-funded care away from tens of millions of Americans. Let that sink in. > An article accompanying this meme reports that government-sponsored, publicly funded healthcare saved the young McConnell’s life: < Mitch McConnell has been relentlessly working to roll back Medicaid and deprive millions of Americans of government-sponsored healthcare coverage for eight years now. But if it weren’t for the government, McConnell wouldn’t be able to walk at all. Young Mitch came down with a terrible case of polio as a child in Alabama. “My mother was, of course, like many mothers of young polio victims, perplexed about what to do, anxious about whether I would be disabled for the rest of my life” he admitted in a 2005 interview. But luckily for him, his mother took him 50 miles to the Warm Springs, where President Roosevelt won his own battle with polio and established a polio treatment center that was paid for by the public. President Roosevelt asked the people of America to send in dimes to the White House as part of his “March of the Dimes” foundation. Over two and a half million dimes were mailed in, and they paid for Mitch’s physical therapy and treatment. > A Death and Taxes article posted on the same date reports a similar story: < How did Warm springs fund McConnell’s therapy, you ask? This was two decades before Lyndon Johnson launched federal health coverage by signing into law the creation of Medicare and Medicaid. In the mid-30s, Roosevelt and his law partner Basil O’Connor founded the Georgia Warm Springs Foundation and started organizing fundraising balls around the country. By 1938, however, the balls grew less effective and the president needed a new strategy. Using a phrase coined by vaudeville entertainer Eddie Cantor, “March of Dimes” — a spin on the popular newsreel series “March of Time” — Roosevelt founded the March of Dimes foundation and launched a campaign asking the public to mail ten-cent donations to the White House. Within a month, Roosevelt received around 2,680,000 dimes. The campaign continued through WWII. McConnell started visiting Warm Springs in 1944. In other words, he overcame polio with the help of public money allocated by the White House. > Mitch McConnell has often told the story of his childhood affliction with polio, and the role of FDR’s Warm Springs rehabilitation center in his recovery. In his 2016 memoir The Long Game, McConnell recounted how he was struck with polio at the age of two while staying with his mother in his aunt’s home in Five Points, Alabama. < It’s one of my life’s great fortunes that Sister’s home was only about sixty miles from Warm Springs, Georgia, where President Franklin D. Roosevelt had established a polio treatment center and where he’d often travel to find relief from the polio that paralyzed him at the age of thirty-nine. My mother took me there every chance she had. The nurses would teach her how to perform exercises meant to rehabilitate my leg while also emphasizing her need to make me believe I could walk, even though I wasn’t allowed to. > So it’s clear that Mitch McConnell did indeed receive significant help — primarily in the form of physical therapy and physical therapy training for his mother — from the polio rehabilitation center established by Roosevelt at Warm Springs, Georgia. However, neither this particular center nor the care given to McConnell were government-funded. Roosevelt purchased the property at Warm Springs, Georgia and established a center there in 1927, having visited frequently for therapy for his own polio, which he contracted in 1921.  He (and others) set up the Warm Springs Foundation, a nonprofit organization that depended on wealthy philanthropists and donations from members of the public. In 1934, Basil O’Connor (once a partner at Roosevelt’s law firm and a close associate of the recently-elected President) began organizing fundraising for the Warm Springs Foundation, set around the President’s birthday celebrations each year. Within four years, these birthday balls had raised $1,350,030 for the Warm Springs rehabilitation center (the equivalent of $23.3 million in 2017). In September 1937, Roosevelt reconstituted the Warm Springs Foundation as the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis (as polio was then widely known); in January 1938, the directors of the foundation launched the first “March of Dimes”, a phrase coined by vaudeville star Eddie Cantor who helped promote a nationwide fundraising drive which attracted the support of Hollywood stars as well as charitable middle-class families giving 10 cents each. In six months, the March of Dimes raised $81,073 (which would be about $1.4 million in 2017). In July 1938, the New York Times published a detailed auditor’s report, which offered a breakdown of donations and expenditure. Some aspects of the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis perhaps reflect a more innocent time. For example, the hundreds of thousands of dimes sent by members of the public were processed at the White House and a cheque was given to Roosevelt, who then turned it over to O’Connor for distribution via the Foundation. However, in many ways the operation was a precursor of the professional, almost corporate style of non-profit fundraising and campaigning that has followed since. For example, a large portion of funds raised in 1938 came from attendees at 8,000 Presidential birthday balls throughout the country, labor organizations contributed the equivalent of $760,000, and the Western Union and Postal Telegraph companies wrote off the cost of thousands of birthday greetings sent to the President at 25 cents per message. The following year, charity sporting events were held throughout the country, and badges were distributed to donors as part of an awareness-raising “Give a Dime and Wear a Button” campaign. Funds raised for the Warm Springs Foundation and National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis were also distributed in the form of research grants to scientists hoping for a breakthrough in the treatment of polio. This came to fruition in the 1950s when Dr. Jonas Salk — who had received a grant from the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis — developed a successful polio vaccine. The Warm Springs center that helped in Mitch McConnell’s recovery was indeed founded by Franklin D. Roosevelt, who was President at the time McConnell was struck by the disease, in 1944. Roosevelt was the driving force behind both the Warm Springs Foundation and its successor, the National Foundation for Infantile Paralysis, and used his political office to energetically promote fundraising for polio care and research. The funding came from the kindness and charity of the public, as well as wealthy celebrities and large corporations. However, it was operated as an innovative, nationwide nonprofit organization, not a federal or state agency, and it was not taxpayer or government-funded. The Warm Springs center visited by McConnell remained owned and operated by a nonprofit organization until 1974, when the state of Georgia took it over, making it truly government-run. Since 2014, it has been owned and operated by Augusta University.Â

McConnell, Mitch.  “The Long Game.” (pg 9,10).  Penguin Random House.  31 May 2016.;New York Times.  “$1,350,030 Raised for Warm Springs.”  New York Times Archive.  16 January 1938.;New York Times.  “Net of $1,021,034 to Paralysis Fund.”  New York Times Archive.  7 July 1938.;New York Times.  “Sport World Aids in Paralysis Drive.”  New York Times Archive.  27 December 1938.

new-research-finally-solves-the-fibromyalgia-mystery

new-research-finally-solves-the-fibromyalgia-mystery

New research has uncovered that the true cause of fibromyalgia is an excess number of specific nerves found near a specific kind of blood vessel in the hands and feet, ending the controversy over the disease’s cause and mechanism.

MOSTLY FALSE

Since at least June 2013, a nearly identical article has appeared on a number of websites with the headline “Fibromyalgia Mystery Finally Solved!” These stories, which continue to appear online, begin with the same claim: < Researchers have found the main source of pain in Fibromyalgia patients, and contrary to what many believe, it does not stem from the brain. The findings mark the end of a decades-old mystery about the disease, which many doctors believed was conjured in patients’ imaginations. […] Up until recently, many physicians thought that the disease was “imaginary” or psychological, but scientists have now revealed that the main source of pain stems from a most unlikely place — excess blood vessels in the hand, legs and foot. > Fibromyalgia is is an enigmatic condition that disproportionately affects women; it is associated with clinically unexplained pain, potentially combined with other symptoms of unknown medical origin. As reported in a 2014 review paper in the Journal of the American Medical Association: < Fibromyalgia may be considered as a discrete diagnosis or as a constellation of symptoms characterized by central nervous system pain amplification with concomitant fatigue, memory problems, and sleep and mood disturbances. > Before diving into the research claims made in this “fibromyalgia solved” brand of clickbait, it is important to mention that framing the issue as a debate between those who think the pain is “imaginary” and those who think it is “real” is an extremely reductive description of the medical hypotheses surrounding fibromyalgia, and, indeed, of pain itself. The most common explanation for the symptoms that present as fibromyalgia in the scientific literature is a phenomenon dubbed “central sensitization”, in which the central nervous system (either through physical trauma or another cause) lowers its threshold for registering external signals as pain. As described in a 2009 review: < Instead [of being caused by an external factor], central sensitization represents an abnormal state of responsiveness or increased gain of the nociceptive system [the part of the sensory nervous system that sends pain signals]. The pain is effectively generated as a consequence of changes within the [central nervous system] that then alter how it responds to sensory inputs, rather than reflecting the presence of [a physical source of pain]. > While central sensitization may not have an external source, the pain is no more “real” or “imaginary” than any other pain caused by an actual physical stimulus. The study referenced in the viral stories, published in 2013 in the journal Pain Medicine, makes an argument for a physical, detectable source of the condition. The study focused on a specific kind of blood vessel in the hand — arteriole venule shunts — that can direct blood flow to bypass the hands in response to temperature, as described in a 2013 press release from the University of Albany, where the research was conducted: < In humans, these types of shunts are unique to the palms of our hands and soles of our feet which work like the radiator in a car. Under warm conditions, the shunts close down to force blood into the capillaries at the surface of the skin in order to radiate heat from the body, and our hands get sweaty. Under cold conditions, the shunts open wide allowing blood to bypass the capillaries in order to conserve heat, and our hands get cold and put on gloves. > The researchers, who were also associated with a biotech company (INTiDYN) that developed the imaging technique used in the study, analyzed biopsies from 24 female patients with fibromyalgia and compared them to a number of healthy control subjects. The authors found that there was a significant excess number of nerves around these shunts in the fibromyalgia patient’s hands. The senior author on the paper, Frank Rice, explained the potential significance of the findings in their press release: < “Instead of being in the brain, the pathology consists of excessive sensory nerve fibers around specialized blood vessel structures located in the palms of the hands,” said Dr. Rice, President of Intidyn and the senior researcher on the study. “This discovery provides concrete evidence of a fibromyalgia-specific pathology which can now be used for diagnosing the disease, and as a novel starting point for developing more effective therapeutics.” > Outside of providing an explanation for fibromyalgia pain, the authors suggest this mechanism could also relate to other symptoms commonly associated with the condition: < In human and nonhuman primates, the [hair-free skin found on the hands and feet] plays a major role in thermoregulation and the maintenance of core body temperature as well as the apportionment of blood to other organs such as skeletal muscle during periods of high metabolic demand. Therefore, [an excess of nerves near arteriole venule shunts in the hair free skin on the hands of fibromyalgia] patients may contribute to extreme tenderness and pain in the hands, but may also contribute to the chronic widespread deep pain, fatigue, sleep disturbances, and cognitive dysfunction associated with [fibromyalgia]. > While the study is real, it was limited in its scope due to its low sample size. Further, it does not appear to have shifted the debate away from hypotheses that revolve primarily around central sensitization, despite claims that the mystery had been “solved”. A 2015 review on the condition released by the Mayo Clinic describes the state of the field: < Earlier there was some doubt about whether there was an “organic basis” for these related conditions, but today there is irrefutable evidence from brain imaging and other techniques that this condition has strong biological underpinnings, even though psychological, social, and behavioral factors clearly play prominent roles in some patients. The pathophysiological hallmark is a sensitized or hyperactive central nervous system that leads to an increased volume control or gain on pain and sensory processing. > While the study is real and their specific results are not in question, it was neither new as of 2017, nor did it substantively change the debate on the cause of fibromyalgia, much less “solve the mystery”. As such, we rank the claim as mostly false.

Savasito, Rebecca.  “Fibromyalgia Mystery Finally Solved!”   Liberty Voice.  20 June 2013.;Clauw, D.J.  “Fibromyalgia: A Clinical Review.”   Journal of the American Medical Association.  April 2014.;Latremoliere, Alban, and Woolf, Clifford J.  “Central Sensitization: A Generator of Pain Hypersensitivity by Central Neural Plasticity.”   Journal of Pain.  September 2009.;Dubine, Adrienne E., and Patapoutian, Ardem.  “Nociceptors: the Sensors of the Pain Pathway”   Journal of Clinical Investigation.  November 2010.;Albrecht, P.J., et al.  “Excessive Peptidergic Sensory Innervation of Cutaneous Arteriole-venule Shunts (AVS) in the Palmar Glabrous Skin of Fibromyalgia Patients: Implications for Widespread Deep Tissue Pain and Fatigue.”   Pain Medicine.  June 2013.;University at Albany News Center.  “University at Albany’s East Campus Biotech Company Makes Major Fibromyalgia Discovery.”   20 June 2013.;Clauw, D.J.  “Fibromyalgia and Related Conditions”   Mayo Clinic Proceedings.  May 2015.

celine-dion-flag-hate-this-country

celine-dion-flag-hate-this-country

MOSTLY TRUE

Singer Celine Dion said that she can't even look at an American flag because she hates the country.

An image featuring two quotes purportedly uttered by singers Celine Dion and Loretta Lynn concerning their opposing views of the United States of America was circulated on social media in September 2017: < “I can’t even look at an American flag any more, I hate this country.” Singer Celine Dion. “You don’t deserve to be American, You’re not Patriot, Patriots love their country, Flag, President and People.” Singer Loretta Lynn. > These quotes are as real as they are grammatically correct — which is to say, not at all. This rumor originated on a clickbait web site (with an apparent vendetta against Dion) called USADailyNewsPosts.com. The fake Dion quote originally appeared in a 1 September 2017 post that consisted solely of an image of the Canadian singer, the inaccurate quote, and a question: Over the next 7 days, USADailyNewsPosts.com concocted a make believe controversy involving flag burnings, talk show appearances, America-hating celebrities, and patriotic country singers. Loretta Lynn was the first to be dragged into this fictional foray when the web site published an post (again, consisting solely of an image and a fake quote) claiming that the country singer had criticized Dion for disrespecting the flag. With ideas in short supply, or possibly in an attempt to see if another singer would prove to be a more reliable source of traffic, the web site then placed this exact fictional phrase in the mouth of singer Cher: Lynn’s (or Cher’s) rebuttal to Dion’s comment set off a series of imaginary events involving Katy Perry, Cyndi Lauper, Ellen Degeneres, Reba McEntire and President Trump. The following image contains a selection of articles from this fake news series (click to enlarge) and is accompanied by our attempt to summarize this bizarre fantasy: < Summary: Celine Dion insults the American flag. Loretta Lynn (or Cher) calls her unpatriotic. This leads to Dion burning the American flag on stage. At this point the web site takes a poll to see if readers would support President Trump if he decided to deport Dion. This causes Katy Perry to voice her support of Dion, while the Canadian singer expresses remorse. It doesn’t last long, however, as Dion goes onto the Ellen Degeneres show to burn another flag. Cyndi Lauper joins team flag burner and Reba McEntire joins the anti-Dions. The Canadian singer is again threatened with deportation, but instead of apologizing, Dion calls Donald Trump sexist. The last entry (at the time of this writing) showcases a fake quote from Cher in which she tells Dion to go back to Canada. Coincidentally, it is the same quote that Reba McEntire allegedly said a few articles prior. > A feud of this magnitude would certainly warrant coverage by newspapers, or, at the very least, gossip magazines. Yet, we found no record of this invented controversy in any credible publication. All the quotes are fake and USADailyNewsPosts.com is not a credible source of information. Â

"tainted" AND "buffet" AND "cause" AND "severe" AND "diarrhea" AND "strip" AND "club"
"diarrhea" AND "strip" AND "club"

tainted-buffet-cause-severe-diarrhea-strip-club

tainted-buffet-cause-severe-diarrhea-strip-club

A "severe diarrhea incident" struck a strip club, affecting dancers and patrons who consumed tainted buffet food.

In late May 2017, the web site Border Herald published the claim that a “tainted buffet” at Jacksonville, Florida, had caused strippers to have diarrhea while onstage: < A popular strip club in Jacksonville, Florida has been closed until further notice after several dancers contracted diarrhea last Friday night. The cause of the incident, which remains under investigation, has been initially linked to a contaminated buffet at the venue. While the investigation continues, the venue has not been named … While the results of the lab analysis are yet to come back, one source familiar with the investigation told reporters that bad shrimp was the most likely cause of the diarrhea. “Typically shrimp are involved in cases like this, particularly when they are not cleaned thoroughly.” Patrons at the venue who were sitting near the stage were the most directly affected by the incident, which occurred close to 11pm. According to a witness at the venue, three dancers were performing on separate poles when the first sign of trouble emerged … It was at this point that the first dancer to suffer from diarrhea was unable to control her bowels any longer, and ‘a stream of brown liquid soon gushed over the stage’, according to the witness … The other dancers on stage also suffered from diarrhea soon after and were forced to abandon their performance. “They had a hard time getting off the stage,” said one witness, who stayed to watch the aftermath of the incident. “High heels and diarrhea really don’t mix.” > Predictably, no news media local to Jacksonville, Florida, reported any such occurrence on 27 May 2017 (or at any other time). Border Herald is one of many regional fake news sites, very few of which carry disclaimers warning readers that their content is untrustworthy. In August 2017, the similarly fake Jackson Telegraph web site published the same story, simply changing the location from Jacksonville, Florida, to Jackson, Mississippi.

is-antifa-planning-a-civil-war

is-antifa-planning-a-civil-war

Law enforcement agents have announced that "antifa" is planning extended violent unrest or civil war beginning on 4 November 2017.

In August 2017, rumors began to spread on social media that anti-fascists (a name often shortened to “antifa”, which has become shorthand for a subset of protestors, usually clad in black and accessorized with bandannas and who are evidently unnerving bloggers and vloggers enough to be the pet topic of many an angry online rant) were planning extended unrest, riots, killing random citizens, or outright civil war beginning on 4 November 2017: Depending on the source, “antifa” (always treated as though it is one homogenous, unified group) is purportedly planning extended riots, joint violence alongside Black Lives Matter and the Black Panthers, or a coup of the American government. The rumors seem to have originated from a video originally published on 30 August 2017 by an individual named Jordan Peltz. Peltz was widely (and incorrectly) identified as a “U.S. Marshal” in the video, which shows him wearing what looked like an official badge that is actually simply printed on his shirt. However, he is not actually law enforcement or military — Peltz instead evidently works as some combination of bail bondsman and bounty hunter. (Claiming to be a United States marshal is very popular among the sovereign citizen set; those involved claim to answer only to their interpretation of common law and maintain they are not subject to other legal conventions, including getting driver’s licenses and paying taxes. Local, state, and federal governments tend to disagree.) On Instagram, Peltz describes his work as “#fugitiverecovery” and “#warrantservice”: Peltz published a video to “clear the air” on 27 September 2017 after reporter JJ MacNab, whose beat includes anti-government and sovereign citizen groups, wrote a thread on Twitter about how militia groups are being goaded into taking up arms against anti-fascists: Peltz responded by stating that his video, which gave an impression he was either predicting or calling for a November 2017 civil war, had been edited — although he didn’t specify when, by whom, or why, despite millions of views and thousands of comments, he had remained unaware it had been altered until he saw reports: < Finding out my video meant for me and few friends had been taken and edited. Only site I thought had it. @jjmacnab should have just msg me pic.twitter.com/G9EGfGjHkf — Veritas’AequitasUSA (@TacticalPoet84) September 24, 2017 > < https://t.co/JNR3co0Qwh Follow-up from my Viral Video and clearing the air. Please, view my IG to see what else was falsely claimed — Veritas’AequitasUSA (@TacticalPoet84) September 28, 2017 > On 29 September 2017, InfoWars published an article using Peltz’s “civil war” wording: < Antifa is planning a new round of nationwide riots on November 4 as part of a plot to start a “civil war” that will lead to the overthrow of the Trump administration. Far-left militants plan to “gather in the streets and public squares of cities and towns across this country” in the hope of building momentum for civil unrest that leads to nothing less than domestic regime change. “Our protest must grow day after day and night after night—thousands becoming hundreds of thousands, and then millions—determined to act to put a stop to the grave danger that the Trump/Pence Regime poses to the world by demanding that this whole regime be removed from power,” states a call to action on the RefuseFascism website. A longer screed posted on the Revolutionary Communist website makes it clear that Antifa is not prepared to wait for electoral change from Democrats, and will engage in a “ferocious struggle,” based on plans outlined in a book written by Bob Avakian, the Chairman of the Revolutionary Communist Party, which is called The Coming Civil War. > The page also cited “antifa” web sites, neither of which threatened violence. One provided a list of Facebook events, and the other read in its entirety: < ON NOVEMBER 4, 2017: We will gather in the streets and public squares of cities and towns across this country, at first many thousands declaring that this whole regime is illegitimate and that we will not stop until our single demand is met: This Nightmare Must End: the Trump/Pence Regime Must Go! Our protest must grow day after day and night after night—thousands becoming hundreds of thousands, and then millions—determined to act to put a stop to the grave danger that the Trump/Pence Regime poses to the world by demanding that this whole regime be removed from power. Our actions will reflect the values of respect for all of humanity and the world we want—in stark contrast to the hate and bigotry of the Trump/Pence fascist regime. Our determination to persist and not back down will compel the whole world to take note. Every force and faction in the power structure would be forced to respond to our demand. The cracks and divisions among the powers already evident today will sharpen and widen. As we draw more and more people forward to stand up, all of this could lead to a situation where this illegitimate regime is removed from power. Spread the word and organize now. Be a part of making history. Don’t let it be said that you stood aside when there was still a chance to stop a regime that imperils humanity and the Earth itself. Join in taking to the streets and the public squares day after day and night after night demonstrating that In the Name of Humanity, We REFUSE to Accept a Fascist America. On November 4, 2017, we will stand together with conviction and courage, overcoming fear and uncertainty, to insist that: This Nightmare Must End: The Trump/Pence Regime Must GO! > @AntifaChecker, a Twitter feed devoted to sniffing out phony “antifa” accounts, said it was not even aware of the call to action: < yeah, we haven’t heard anything about november 4 — Antifa Checker (@AntifaChecker) October 1, 2017 > An article in L.A. Weekly reported on both the freeway protest and upcoming events: < Their placards bore letters that spelled out “NOV 4 IT BEGINS.” But they couldn’t get enough volunteers to hold all 12 letters, so the tallest among them, the ones with the broadest wingspans, held up two letters each. The eight people weren’t enough to block the on-ramp, so some motorists were able to swerve around. [Organizer and USC film professor Perry] Hoberman says the protest was conceived in part to get the word out about a Nov. 4 demonstration the group is planning. He says it’s being modeled on the Women’s March held in January at Pershing Square and that organizers hope the action will include an encampment in a public place, à la Occupy Wall Street, or at least a prolonged series of protests over several days. At one point on Tuesday they knelt on the freeway, which organizer Michelle Xai says was to acknowledge “black and Latino people who have been and continue to be murdered by police.” A video of the protest uploaded to the group’s Facebook page has more than 700,000 views. Many of the 24,000-plus commenters ask for more information about Nov. 4. Plenty of others object to the group’s inconveniencing motorists, and some appear to endorse running them over. > It is true that some groups linked to the antifa movement planned co-ordinated protests on 4 November 2017, but that had nothing to do with Peltz’s video expressing disdain for the group in August 2017, nor did he appear to have any insider law enforcement knowledge, as he does not work as law enforcement himself. When a wave of rumors about 4 November anti-fascist protests began, his clip became part of the claim as “evidence” that a “federal officer” warned of coming violence. In reality, a list of apparently peaceful protests were paired with an older, unrelated video to create the impression of a looming threat. Peltz himself walked the claims far back after his video brought him unwanted attention and scrutiny. There was an uptick in the rumor’s spread on 1 November 2017, when the groups advertised the 4 November 2017 demonstrations in the New York Times.Â

Smith IV, Jack.  “The Far-Right Thinks A Violent Antifa Overthrow Is Coming Nov. 4, But The Truth Is Far Stranger.”   Mic.  2 November 2017.

cia-agent-confesses-wtc7

cia-agent-confesses-wtc7

David Mikkelson

A dying CIA agent confessed to blowing up WTC Building 7 on 9/11 through controlled demolition.

On 13 July 2017, the YourNewsWire web site published an implausible article reporting that a dying CIA agent named Malcom Howard confessed to blowing up WTC Building 7 on 9/11 through controlled demolition: < 79-year-old retired CIA agent, Malcom Howard, has made a series of astonishing claims since being released from hospital in New Jersey on Friday and told he has weeks to live. Mr. Howard claims he was involved in the “controlled demolition” of World Trade Center 7, the third building that was destroyed on 9/11. Mr. Howard, who worked for the CIA for 36 years as an operative, claims he was tapped by senior CIA agents to work on the project due to his engineering background, and early career in the demolition business. Trained as a civil engineer, Mr. Howard became an explosives expert after being headhunted by the CIA in early 1980s. Mr. Howard says has extensive experience in planting explosives in items as small as cigarette lighters and as large as “80 floor buildings.” The 79-year-old New Jersey native says he worked on the CIA operation they dubbed “New Century” between May 1997 and September 2001, during a time he says the CIA “was still taking orders from the top.” Mr. Howard says he was part of a cell of 4 operatives tasked with ensuring the demolition was successful. > There was no truth to the story, which originated with YourNewsWire, a fake news site. As is often the case with fake news, the article lacked critical details such as when and where the confession occurred (other than the vague reference to its taking place “at home”), YourNewsWire provide no explanation of how they alone (and no other news source) learned of this confession, and we found nothing documenting the existence of a former CIA agent named Malcom Howard outside of the just-published YourNewsWire piece. Moreover, the article closely mimicked another fake news story published by YourNewsWire less than a month earlier, one holding that a retired MI5 agent had similarly confessed on his deathbed to assassinating Princess Diana. The conspiracy theory that WTC7 was brought down through a secret controlled demolition (thereby establishing that the 9/11 attacks were a “false flag operation” and/or an “inside job”) have been comprehensively debunked, with the evidence demonstrating that fire alone caused the building’s collapse.

myeshia-johnson-facebook-post

myeshia-johnson-facebook-post

Gold Star widow Myeshia Johnson criticized Rep. Frederica Wilson on Facebook for misrepresenting the content of a condolence call from President Donald Trump.

Conservative social media users circulated an image of a purported Facebook post from 17 October 2017 which they said showed Gold Star widow Myeshia Johnson accusing Rep. Frederica Wilson (D-Florida) of exploiting a presidential condolence call over the death of her husband, U.S. Army Sgt. La David Johnson, for political gain: The picture allegedly depicts a post from Myeshia Johnson’s Facebook page dated “17 October 2017 at 3:27 p.m.” saying: < I want to set the record straight! I’m getting sick and tired of this so called politician using my husband as a political platform. Even buy [sic] her own words she did not hear all of the conversation she only heard part of it. This is what actually was said. “They know the risk, they know what they sign up for but they still volunteer to put their lives on the line for their fellow Americans. We owe them a debt that can never be repaid” > A phone call from President Donald Trump to Johnson is at the center of what has become a public dispute between Johnson and the Trump administration. But the validity of the screenshot is doubtful. While the date of the post corresponds with that of the 17 October 2017 condolence call, the time listed is actually more than an hour before the reported time of President Trump’s phone call, which was 4:45 p.m. Eastern time. Also, the picture shows a Facebook profile bearing a square profile picture. But the social media site implemented an update in August 2017 that changed the shape of users’ profile pictures in the Facebook newsfeed from square to round, as seen in this example from the Snopes.com Facebook page (top left): La David Johnson was killed while serving in Niger on 4 October 2017, in what has been described as an ambush by Islamic insurgents. Three other U.S. service members, Staff Sgt. Bryan C. Black, Staff Sgt. Jeremiah W. Johnson, and Staff Sgt. Dustin M. Wright, were also killed in the attack, as were four Nigerien troops. Rep. Wilson said she was riding with the Army sergeant’s widow and members of her family to receive his body when the President called, telling CNN host Don Lemon that night: < I heard what [Trump] said because the phone was on speaker. Basically he said, “Well, I guess he knew what he signed up for, but I guess it still hurt.” That’s what he said. > Wilson accused Trump of being insensitive not only to La David Johnson’s family but “to the family of every soldier that has paid the ultimate price for our freedom.” The sergeant’s mother, Cowanda Jones-Johnson, has corroborated Wilson’s account of the phone call, saying that “President Trump did disrespect my son and my daughter and also me and my husband.” President Trump responded by denying what Rep. Wilson had claimed: < I didn’t say what that congresswoman said. Didn’t say it all. She knows it. I had a very nice conversation with the woman, with the wife who was — sounded like a lovely woman. Did not say what the congresswoman said, and most people aren’t too surprised to hear that. > On 23 October 2017, Myeshia Johnson told ABC News that Wilson was “100 percent” in her description of the phone call. She said: < The President said that he knew what he signed up for, but it hurts anyway. And it made me cry cause I was very angry at the tone of his voice and how he said he couldn’t remember my husband’s name. The only way he remembered my husband’s name is because he told me he had my husband’s report in front of him and that’s when he actually said La David. I heard him stumblin’ on, trying to remember my husband’s name and that’s what hurt me the most, because if my husband is out here fighting for our country and he risked his life for our country why can’t you remember his name. > But while President Trump suggested he had proof to support his account of events, White House spokesperson Sarah Huckabee Sanders told reporters that the call had not been not recorded. Instead, Sanders said, Chief of Staff Gen. John Kelly and other White House staff members were near President Trump when he phone Myeshia Johnson and heard what he said. For his part, Kelly called Wilson an “empty barrel” and accused her of taking credit in 2015 for the funding of a Federal Bureau of Investigation field office in Miami, a claim that was debunked by footage of Wilson’s remarks that was posted online on 20 October 2017. Despite Sanders’ statement that the president’s conversation with Myeshia Johnson was not recorded, Lara Trump, the president’s daughter-in-law and host of a Facebook broadcast devoted to what his administration calls “real news,” asserted on 20 October 2017 that she had read a transcript of the call which confirmed Trump spoke the words in question, albeit with additional context: < [Trump] said, “Your husband went into battle, you know, knowing that he could be injured, knowing that he could be killed, and he still did it because he loved this country, and he did it for the American people.” > Wilson came under additional criticism after she responded to Kelly’s allegations by exclaiming that “You mean to tell me that I’ve become so important that the White House is following me and my words? This is amazing. That’s amazing. I’ll have to tell my kids that I’m a rockstar now.” Two days earlier, Rep. Wilson had issued a statement reading: < Despite President Trump’s suggestion that I have recanted my statement or misstated what he said, I stand firmly by my original account of his conversation with Myeshia Johnson, the widow of Sgt. La David Johnson. Moreover, this account has been confirmed by family members who also witnessed Mr. Trump’s incredible lack of compassion and sensitivity. The Johnson family and the families of the three other soldiers who tragically lost their lives in the Niger ambush are experiencing what I am certain must feel like an unbearable loss. Rather than engage in a petty war of words with Mr. Trump, it is so much more important to embrace and support the families and honor these fallen heroes. > We reached out to Rep. Wilson for comment but have not yet received a response.

Sabovic, Sanela et al.  “Trump to Widow of Sgt. La David Johnson: ‘He Knew What He Signed Up For.'”   WPLG-TV.  17 October 2017.;Wilson, Frederica S.  “Congresswoman Frederica S. Wilson Stands by Account of President Trump’s Condolence Call to the Widow of Sgt. La David Johnson.”   18 October 2017.;Kelly, Heather.  “Facebook’s Adding Text Bubbles and Round Profiles.”   CNN.  15 August 2017.;Sabovic, Sanela.  “Remains of US Army Sgt. La David Johnson return to Miami.”   WPLG-TV.  17 October 2017.;CNN.  “Congresswoman Describes Trump’s Call to Widow.”   17 October 2017.;Gearan, Anne and Kristine Phillips.  “Fallen Soldier’s Mother: ‘Trump Did Disrespect My Son.'”   The Washington Post.  18 October 2017.;de Moraes, Lisa.  “White House: No Recording Of Donald Trump’s Phone Call to Widow of Soldier Killed in ISIS Ambush.”   Deadline.  18 October 2017.;Barszewski, Larry.  “Frederica Wilson 2015 Video Shows White House Chief of Staff John Kelly Got It Wrong.”   The Sun-Sentinel. nbsp; 20 October 2017.;Holly, Jessica.  “Congresswoman Reacts to White House Statement on Call to Army’s Family.”   WSVN-TV.  19 October 2017.;Searcey, Dionnne et al.  “Conflicting Accounts in Niger Ambush Are Subject of Pentagon Investigation.”   The New York Times.  20 October 2017.;Slattery, Denis.  “Lara Trump Says She ‘Read Exactly What’ President Said to Fallen Soldier’s Widow Even Though There’s No Transcript.”   [New York] Daily News.  20 October 2017.;Nestel, M.L. “‘I Was Very Angry’ at Trump, Says Myeshia Johnson, Widow of Fallen Soldier.” ABC News. 23 October 2017.

rat-meat-chicken-wings

rat-meat-chicken-wings

300,000 pounds of rat meat disguised as chicken wings were sold in the U.S.

On 15 February 2016, the web site Urban Image Magazine published an article claiming that 300,000 pounds of counterfeit chicken wings sold prior to that year’s Super Bowl were actually rat meat. However, the source cited by the web site was World News Daily Report, a well-known peddler of fabricated news. On 6 February 2016, that web site& had published the claim just ahead of the 7 February 2016 football championship event: < San Francisco, CA | The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) is concerned about an estimated 300,000 pounds of counterfeit rat meat that has been sold as chicken wings in restaurants and grocery stores across America. FDA inspectors raised concerns when several illegal containers originating from China were seized by customs at the Port of San Francisco and were found to contain rat meat that was meant to be shipped to different meat processing plants across America and resold as chicken … the FDA warns an estimated 300,000 pounds of the counterfeit rat meat might still be in circulation and could finish in American plates during the Super Bowl this Sunday. “The Super Bowl is a period where chicken wings are in high demand and where restaurants and grocery stores often face a penury” explains FDA inspector, Ronald Jones. “This is where the illegal market comes in. Although there is nothing dangerous about consuming rat meat if it is properly cooked, United States laws prohibit the import and sales of rat meat as a comestible item,” he adds. > As with all of World News Daily Report‘s articles, the claim had no basis in truth. The article used an unrelated image published to the internet in 2014, itself unrelated to chicken wings or the 2016 Super Bowl. The “chicken wings are rat meat” claim was swiped in 2017 by the fake news site Now44News. In March 2017, the Food and Drug Administration addressed and debunked the story: < U.S. officials didn’t seize thousands of pounds of imported rat meat prior to the Super Bowl and they never issued a warning saying restaurants and food stores could be selling it as chicken wings, despite reports shared widely on multiple websites. The stories claim federal customs officials at the Port of San Francisco seized several thousands of pounds of rat meat imported from China. They also mention an FDA warning that some 300,000 pounds of rat meat could still be in circulation as Super Bowl parties approached. FDA spokesman Peter Cassell told The Associated Press that the agency “is not aware of the seizure of rat meat referenced” and the FDA never issued such a warning. The stories quote two agency officials, but the FDA has no record of any current or past employees with those names, Cassell said. >

"black" AND "lives" AND "matter" AND "emergency" AND "crews" AND "hurricane"

black-lives-matter-emergency-crews-hurricane

black-lives-matter-emergency-crews-hurricane

A group of Black Lives Matter protesters blocked emergency crews from providing aide to those stranded by Hurricane Harvey.

As emergency crews rushed to the aid of those stranded in Houston due to the flood waters brought by Hurricane Harvey in August 2017, the web site Our Land of the Free published a fake news article claiming that Black Lives Matter “thugs” had blocked ambulances and fire trucks from entering the city: < This is just sick! Emergency crews are working hard to make sure that they can be there to rescue Hurricane Harvey victims, but lefist punks from the Black Lives Matter clique don’t think people deserve to be saved. While blacks whined about having to spend a few minutes on rooftops as George W. Bush worked hard to keep people safe after Hurricane Katrina hit, they are now so “woke” that their need to have people hear them scream that some thug who punched a cop got hurt (insert any one you can think of here) has dwarfed their desire to seed people safe from the Hurricane. Police are currently engaged in a standoff with the “protesters,” who decided to block traffic because Donald Trump is a “racist” according to chants from the unruly mob. Already, fire trucks and ambulances are forced to turn around and find another route after the Black Lives Crew decided to flip one of them on its side. Two paramedics were injured in the attack. > This story was reproduced by a number of other outlets and presented it as if it was a genuine news story. Our Land of the Free, however, is not a reputable source of news. The web site carries two disclaimers informing readers that it does not publish factual content: < We believe in the right to be free. No matter what, the freedom to do what we want, say what we want and publish what we want comes first. Therefore we make no guarantee that what you read here is true. In fact, it most definitely is not. Our Land Of The Free is here to entertain you with the kind of whimsical satire conservatives enjoy. Ourlandofthefree.com makes no guarantee that anything you find here will be based at all in reality. All posts should be considered satirical and all images photoshopped to look like something they’re not. It’s not you, it’s me. > The image used by “Our Land of the Free” to illustrate this story does show Black Lives Matter protesters on a highway. However, this image was taken from a July 2016 CNN video, which shows a group of people protesting police shootings in Atlanta (during which time no emergency crews were blocked). This is a recycled version of a story that has cropped up on a regular basis since at least 2015, generally implicating Black Lives Matter or anti-Trump protesters in the death of an innocent person. None of these stories have ever been proven to be true. We’ve encountered no reports of Black Lives Matter protesters interfering with the rescue efforts related to Hurricane Harvey, let alone flipping an ambulance on its side. This rumor originated from a fake news web site, and it featured a still shot from an unrelated video. Having a group of protesters block major roads or freeway in Houston in the days after Harvey made landfall would be quite a feat at any rate, considering that most of its main thoroughfares and freeways were already underwater.

Sullivan, Kevin.  “Harvey May Force 30,000 People Into Shelters While Flooding Will Linger, Officials Warn.”   The Washington Post.  28 August 2017.;CNN.  “Protesters Shut Down Highway.”   9 July 2016.

worker-pepsi-frooti-hiv-blood-beverage

worker-pepsi-frooti-hiv-blood-beverage

David Mikkelson

A worker at a Pepsi or Frooti plant has contaminated those beverage products by injecting HIV-infected blood into them.

A warning about HIV-contaminated Pepsi products began spreading on the Internet and via cell phone text message in July 2011 (with a resurgence in September 2012), and it has also been echoed in recurrent rumors about Mango Frooti, a popular beverage in India: < [Collected via e-mail, July 2011] I am hearing that someone with HIV at a pepsi plant has injected their blood into the product during plant production. Is this true? Why would they still be selling the product I thought. But some people are saying the news said to not drink it right now. [Collected via e-mail, September 2012] URGENT NEWS. There’s news from the police. Its an urgent message for all. For next few days don’t drink any product from pepsi company’s like pepsi, tropicana juice, slice, 7up etc. A worker from the company has added his blood contaminated with AIDS. Watch NDTV. please forward this to everyone on your list [Collected via e-mail, May 2014] NOTE: Important msg from Delhi police to all over India: For the next few weeks do not drink any product of Frooti, as a worker from the company has added his blood contaminated with HIV (AIDS). It ws shown yesterday on NDTV… Pls forward this msg urgently to people you care… Take Care!! [Collected via e-mail, September 2017] ‘è notizia dalla polizia. È un messaggio urgente per tutti. Per i prossimi giorni non bevi nessun prodotto della Coca Cola, come la coda nera, il fioravanti di succhi, lo sprite ecc. Un lavoratore aziendale ha aggiunto il suo sangue contaminato da AIDS. Vedi MDTV. Si prega di inviare questo messaggio a tutti gli utenti della tua lista. REPETIR: Messaggio importante dalla polizia metropolitana a tutti i cittadini Per le prossime settimane, non bevi alcun prodotto COCA COLA, in quanto un lavoratore della società ha aggiunto il suo sangue contaminato da HIV (AIDS). E ‘stato mostrato ieri in Sky News. Invia questo messaggio alle persone che ti interessano. REPORT: Important Message from the metropolitan police to all citizens ‘It is news from the police. It is an urgent message for all. For the next few days do not not drink any product of Coca Cola, as the ‘black tail,’ Fioravanti juice, Sprite etc. A corporate worker has added his own blood contaminated by AIDS. See MDTV. Please send this message to all users of your list. For the next few weeks, not drink any product COCA COLA as a worker of the company has added his own blood contaminated with HIV (AIDS). It was shown yesterday in Sky News. Send this message to the people you care about. > Such rumors are standard food contamination urban legends akin to the leper in the Chesterfield factory rumor. No news accounts, government agencies, or other reliable sources have reported Pepsi or Frooti products being contaminated with HIV-infected blood. In May 2013, Parie Agro (Frooti’s parent company) responded to this “unjustified rumor” by posting the following message on their Facebook page: As for whether consumers can acquire HIV via contaminated food or beverages, the Centers for Disease Control (CDC) emphatically says they cannot: < No incident of food being contaminated with HIV-infected blood or semen has been reported to CDC. Furthermore, CDC has received no reports of HIV infection resulting from eating food, including condiments. HIV does not live long outside the body. Even if small amounts of HIV-infected blood or semen was consumed, exposure to the air, heat from cooking, and stomach acid would destroy the virus. Therefore, there is no risk of contracting HIV from eating food. > HIV does not long survive outside its host medium of human bodily fluids: blood, semen, vaginal fluid, breast milk, saliva, tears. (Which is not to say HIV can be transmitted by every one of those: according to the CDC, “Contact with saliva, tears, or sweat has never been shown to result in transmission of HIV.”) The CDC says except under laboratory conditions, HIV is unable to reproduce outside its living host; it does not spread or maintain infectiousness outside its host. Therefore, were HIV-tainted blood to be mixed into foodstuffs or beverages, the virus would neither survive nor while it was still viable multiply and so replenish itself. Although such cases are rare, the CDC confirms that people have acquired HIV through oral contact with, or swallowing of, HIV-laden bodily fluids. However, no known infections involving oral transmission of HIV have so far come from contact with, or ingestion of, a food product or beverage; all such infections involved sexual contact. Other ingestibles have previously been fingered as vehicles for the transmission of HIV-infected blood to the unsuspecting public, and these stories too were baseless: The 2004 scare about restaurant ketchup dispensers and the 2005-2006 scare about pineapples.

frederica-wilson-veterans

frederica-wilson-veterans

Representative Frederica Wilson has never supported a bill intended to help military veterans.

Amid an ongoing public dispute between President Donald Trump and Rep. Frederica Wilson over the contents of a phone conversation Trump had with Myeshia Johnson, the widow of Sergeant La David Johnson, some conservatives have turned their attention to Wilson’s past policies on military veterans. On 21 October 2017, the conservative Western Journalism web site reported: < Rep. Frederica Wilson has cast herself as the champion of veterans and their families with her recent attacks on President Donald Trump over comments he denies making to a Gold Star family. However, when it was time to cast a vote for veterans, the record shows that the Florida Democrat has not supported key legislation — or any legislation supporting veterans at all, for that matter. > The article goes on to accurately describe parts of Wilson’s voting pattern on veterans-related legislation but also fails to mention other bills that she has co-sponsored and voted for, which were intended to assist veterans. Thus, the article gives a woefully incomplete and misleading picture of Wilson’s legislative history in regards to military veterans. The claim, in the Western Journalism article’s headline, that Wilson has “never supported a pro-Veteran bill” is utterly and demonstrably false. The VoteSmart.org web site—cited by Western Journalism, and in an earlier Fox News report—does not exhaustively list every bill which was in any way related to veterans, or had implications, but rather selects “key votes.” This incomplete collection is the basis of both articles. That VoteSmart.org summary states that since Wilson became a member of the House of Representatives in 2011, she has: There are many legislative measures that were not included in the “key votes” summary on VoteSmart.org, or in the Western Journalism article. The following is a very small sample of Wilson’s participation in legislation intended to help military veterans. An extensive list can be found here. Â

Mikelionis, Lukas. “Florida Democrat Wilson no Friend of Veterans, Vote Record Shows.”  Fox News. 19 October 2017.

louis-farrakhan-jesus-redeemer

louis-farrakhan-jesus-redeemer

During a speech in which he declared Jesus Christ his "redeemer," Muslim leader Louis Farrakhan gave indications that he was breaking with Islam in favor of following Christianity.

In August 2017, various online sources reported that Louis Farrakhan, the 84-year-old leader of the Chicago-based religious group Nation of Islam, had posted a video on his Facebook page in which he declared Jesus as his redeemer, seemingly contradicting his own Muslim teachings. For example, the Christian Post stated: < Reflecting on his inevitable physical death, leader of the Nation of Islam, Louis Farrakhan, 84, declared in a controversial video recording Tuesday that Jesus will save him from the grip of death despite his organization’s creed that there is only “One God whose proper Name is Allah.” The declaration came the same day Farrakhan was shown visiting Bishop Larry Trotter, longtime pastor of Chicago’s Sweet Holy Spirit Church, who was hospitalized last Wednesday with a “serious illness” following a trip to Israel. “I thank God for guiding me for 40 years absent my teacher (Elijah Muhammad). So my next journey will have to answer the question. I’m gonna say it,” Farrakhan teased briefly in the clip before declaring: “I know that my redeemer liveth.” > Similarly, Dan Calabrese of Canada Free Press wrote: < Nation of Islam leader Louis Farrakhan is 84 years old. We all know the Islamic radicalism and racial division he’s been preaching for decades, so there’s no reason to go over it in detail here. But what’s this? Farrakhan released this video yesterday, and if it’s what it appears to be on first glace, he’s made quite a radical change of direction: My first instinct was to find a loophole in his wording. When Farrakhan said “my Jesus lives” and emphasized the “my,” I thought maybe he was trying to give himself license to declare that his “redeemer” can be whoever he wants it to be, and that he could express that by referring to said redeemer as “my Jesus.” That would be more consistent with the way Farrakhan has expressed himself throughout his public life. But what about this? “I say to the devil, I know I gotta pay a price for what I’ve been teaching all these years. You can have the money, you can have the clothes, you can have the suit, you can have the house but, me, you can’t have.” If that doesn’t sound like full-throated repentence, I don’t know what does. > And, according to Black Christian News: < Louis Farrakhan, leader of the Nation of Islam, has declared that Jesus Christ is his “Redeemer” and has indicated that he knows he will have to “pay” for his false teachings. In a video released Tuesday, while reflecting on his inevitable death, the 84-year-old religious teacher said, “I thank God for guiding me for forty years absent my teacher [Elijah Muhammad]. So my next journey will have to answer the question. I’m gonna say it: I know that my redeemer liveth.” He emphasized, “I know. I’m not guessing that my Jesus is alive. I know that my redeemer liveth and because he lives I know that I, too, will pass through the portal of death yet death will not afflict me.” > The video clip is authentic, released via Farrakhan’s multiple social media accounts. However, the interpretation of his words as a sign of a deep change in his belief system — specifically, as a turning away from or renunciation of Islam and a conversion, tentative or complete, to Christianity — is erroneous and disproven by other statements he has made before and since. Regarding the excerpt itself, the clip represents a minute and a half of a speech that lasted an hour and 41 minutes. Farrakhan said a great many things during the 30 July 2017 talk, which was delivered from the pulpit of the Union Temple Baptist Church in Washington, D.C. on the occasion of the 40th pastoral anniversary of his friend, the Rev. Willie Wilson: Going deeper, Farrakhan’s writings and speeches indicate he believes that the Messiah prophesied in the Torah, the Qur’an, and the Bible — the figure to whom he refers as “my redeemer” — is, in fact, former Nation of Islam leader Elijah Muhammad, who died in 1975, but whom Farrakhan believes is still “physically alive”: < “I haven’t been the same since,” said Min. Farrakhan. “Because everything that Elijah Muhammad said to me made sense. It would not make sense if he were dead, it could only make since if he’s alive and all the things he told me about myself and my future didn’t make sense if he was dead. But when I came to see that he was alive, Saviours’ Day 1981, I mentioned it.” > Confusion also surrounds Farrakhan’s statement that “I know I gotta pay a price for what I’ve been teaching all these years.” Some have taken it to mean Farrakhan was admitting he will have to repent to God for uttering false teachings (i.e., Islam), but that interpretation ignores the opening of his statement, which begins: “I say to the devil, I know I gotta pay a price for what I’ve been teaching all these years.” In context, Farrakhan was speaking of the price he will have to pay for a lifetime of standing up against the false religion (“corrupted” Christianity) invented by Satan and preached by white people to deceive blacks into accepting subjugation and slavery. Farrakhan is saying he knows the devil will extract payment, but there’s a limit to what he can take: < I say to the devil, I know I gotta pay a price for what I’ve been teaching all these years. You can have the money, you can have the clothes, you can have the suit, you can have the house but me you can’t have. > In short, it’s a grave mistake to take Louis Farrakhan’s pronouncements about Jesus Christ as having the same meaning ordinary Christians (or even Muslims) would give them. It’s an even greater mistake to suppose that Farrakhan renounced Islam. Here’s a tweet he composed barely a month after delivering the above address: < You have to know and believe that Allah is sufficient for all our needs. — MINISTER FARRAKHAN (@LouisFarrakhan) September 3, 2017 > We reached out to the Nation of Islam for comment on this rumor, but have not yet received a reply.

Blair, Leonardo.   “Nation of Islam’s Louis Farrakhan Declares Jesus Is His Redeemer, Says Devil Can’t Have Him.”    The Christian Post.   25 August 2017.;Calabrese, Dan.   “Wait … Did Louis Farrakhan Just Declare Jesus Is Lord?”    Canada Free Press.   30 August 2017.;Farrakhan, Louis.   “A Savior Is Born for the Black Man and Woman of America.”    Final Call.   27 February 1983.;Muhammad, Ashahed M.   “Hon. Elijah Muhammad Fulfills Prophetic Role, Says Minister Farrakhan.”    Final Call.   12 March 2012.;Black Christian Network.   “Watch: Louis Farrakhan Declares Jesus Is His ‘Redeemer,’ Says He Has to ‘Pay for What He’s Been Teaching All These Years.”    28 August 2017.;Nation of Islam.   “Honorable Minister Louis Farrakhan.”    Visited 4 September 2017.

does-arctic-ice-doubt-reality-climate-change

does-arctic-ice-doubt-reality-climate-change

Measurements indicating that 2017 had relatively more sea ice in the Arctic and less melting of glacial ice in Greenland casts scientific doubt on the reality of global warming.

On 1 October 2017, pseudoscientific alternative health website NaturalNews.com, which is geared primarily toward supplement enthusiasts with a discerning taste for deep state conspiracy theories, posted an article (“Don’t Look Now, But Arctic Sea Ice Mass Has Grown Almost 40% Since 2012”) that attempts to cast doubt on the scientific veracity of global warming by first presenting the following grotesque caricature of a straw man argument: < One of the most popular pieces of “evidence” that climate alarmists just love to bring up to prove the global warming narrative is the “all the ice is melting in the Arctic and the polar bears are dying” line. We’ve all seen the documentaries where a polar bear is desperately clinging to a tiny piece of ice and you just know he’s going to die soon. > They article then presents two observations that make the generally factual point that there has been relatively more sea ice in the Arctic and glacial ice on Greenland in 2017 than there have been at specific times in the recent past: < The latest figures from the National Snow and Ice Data Center, located at the University of Colorado, show that sea ice extent has increased by 40 percent since 2012. […] [The Danish Polar Portal reports that]: If we rank the annual surface mass balance since 1981 from low to high, the lowest on record was 2011-2012 (38 Gt) and this year is the 5th highest out of the 37 year record. > To be clear, the primary data scientists use to document global warming are records of Earth’s temperature over time, not doomed polar bear imagery. Zeke Hausfather, a research scientist for the independent, nongovernmental Berkeley Earth research group told us in an e-mail that, in this area, pretty much “all groups who provide estimates” of global temperature unequivocally point to nearly uninterrupted temperature rises since the 1970s, as shown in this comparison of various estimates produced by the climate and energy policy website Carbon Brief: “People interested in global warming are best-served looking at actual global temperatures,” Hausfather said. While this temperature trend is uncontroversial and clear, the climate system as a whole is a complex beast with numerous entangled parts. The basic approach to writing a blog post that “debunks” the concept of global warming is to highlight without explanation various parts of that system at a single point in time. NaturalNews.com is no exception to that basic strategy here. Arctic Sea Ice Natural News cites a climate change denial blog called ClimateDepot.com as evidence of the claim that sea ice has grown 40 percent since 2012. In reality, the claim made by this website was more specific and less useful. In a post dated 18 September 2017, Climate Depot stated: < Arctic sea ice extent is up 40% from this date five years ago. > “Sea ice extent” is one of many different metrics used to characterize the presence of sea ice, and is generally defined as “the area of ocean [based on pixels in satellite imagery] where at least 15 percent of the surface is frozen”. On the day of 17 September 2017, sea ice extent was indeed higher than it was on 17 September 2012: This does not mean, however, that sea ice has grown almost 40 percent since 2012, nor does it mean that the overall trend in arctic sea ice is toward growth — it hasn’t and it isn’t. The issue here is that sea ice extent is quite variable from year to year, and thus looking at two discrete points is a fairly useless exercise without the full context. “We don’t expect it to monotonically decrease every year,” Hausfather told us. This chart (using data from the National Snow and Ice Data Center) shows September sea ice extent compared against the same average used in the maps cited by Climate Depot, showing both this aforementioned variability but also an overall trend of reduced ice extent. Note that the year 2012 was no random year to select for comparison; it is actually the record lowest year in terms of Arctic sea ice extent — making anything compared to it necessarily higher: The overall trend of declining sea ice is even clearer when you look at a different measure: sea ice volume (presented by the Polar Science Center, below). Not only do such records show a clear negative trend, they also show just how anomalous 2012 was as a data point: In reality, 2017 was the eighth lowest year on record for Arctic sea ice extent since satellite measurements began in 1978. But in no world but the pseudo-scientific fringe internet would the concept of global warming rely on every single year breaking the previous year’s record for sea ice minimum. Tom Karl, the former director of NOAA’s National Centers for Environmental Information, told us that 2017’s sea ice extent was still much lower than the 1980-2010 average (by two standard deviations), and that, despite claims to the contrary, “one can’t look at a trend over 5 years and say much about the impact of global warming as other factors are also important on these short time scales.” Glacial Ice on Greenland The NaturalNews.com approach for glacial ice on Greenland was similarly lacking scale and context. The main source for these arguments was a completely legitimate end-of-year report put out by the Danish Polar Portal, a website run by the Danish Meteorological Institute. In that report, the organization makes this factual statement: < Heavy snow and rain in winter with a relatively short and intermittent summer melt season have left the Greenland ice sheet with more ice than has been usual over the last twenty years — in fact we have to go back to the 1980s and 90s to see a year similar to this one in terms of snow fall and ice melt. > This statement, and the figures presented by NaturalNews.com, are referring to a metric known as Surface Mass Balance (SMB), which Polar Portal describes: < Each year glaciers gain ice from snow and freezing rain and lose ice by melt that runs off. Adding these together gives the surface mass budget (SMB) in Greenland, the ice sheet typically gains mass from around September to May and loses more mass than it gains in the ablation [melting] season of June, July and August. > Importantly, however, this measurement only presents half the picture in terms of how much mass is being lost from year to year from Greenland’s glaciers. That’s because it does not include the rather significant portion of ice that breaks — or calves — off into the ocean to melt elsewhere. On average this accounts for about 500 Gt [gigatons] of further ice loss. This, as stated in the Polar Portal post, nearly matches the estimated gain in SMB reported by Natural News, effectively canceling it out. In a post on Carbon Brief, analysts with the Danish Meteorological Society put this year’s measurement in context: < While the Greenland ice sheet has seen a neutral, or small positive, change in ice for this year, it should be noted that Greenland has lost approximately 3,600bn tonnes of ice since 2002. > Like the record of Arctic sea ice earlier, when put in the context of the entire trend of Greenland’s ice mass over time (presented by Polar Portal below), 2017’s measurement does nothing to change larger and completely unambiguous trends of overall melting:  Further, in the case of Greenland’s ice sheet, there is not much of a mystery surrounding the lackluster amount of melting this year; a massive storm — the remnants of Hurricane Nicole — parked itself atop the continent, dumping a large amount of snow on the ice-covered continent: < Heavy rain and snow in October in especially eastern Greenland gave record totals of precipitation in the main east coast town of Tasiilaq as the remnants of former hurricane Nicole passed by and, much as with Harvey in Houston this year, got lodged over eastern Greenland for some days. However, after Nicole’s extreme precipitation, the rest of the winter was actually pretty average in terms of the amount of snow that fell. > Because neither the higher-than-2012 arctic sea ice from 17 September 2017 nor the neutral amount of ice loss in Greenland in 2017 do anything to disrupt the overall trends of decreasing ice, and because climatological science does not require (nor does it expect) ice or temperature records to be broken every single year, we rank the claim that these observations are reasons to doubt the tenets of climate change as false.

Watson, Tracey.  “Don’t Look Now, but Arctic Sea Ice Mass Has Grown Almost 40% Since 2012.”   Natural News.  1 October 2017.;Mottram, Ruth, et al.  “Guest Post: How the Greenland Ice Sheet Fared in 2017.”   Carbon Brief.  1 September 2017.;Polar Portal.  “End of the SMB Season Summary 2017.”   12 September 2017.;Morano, Marc.  “Massive Arctic Ice Gain (Up 40%) Since Low Point of 2012”.   Climate Depot.  19 September 2012.;Hausfather, Zeke.  “State of the Climate: Warm Temperatures and Low Sea Ice Mark First Half of 2017.”   Carbon Brief.  21 July 2017.;National Snow and Ice Data Center.  “Arctic Sea Ice at Minimum Extent.”   19 September 2017.;Polar Science Center.  “PIOMAS Arctic Sea Ice Volume Reanalysis.”   Accessed 4 October 2017.;NASA.  “End-of-Summer Arctic Sea Ice Extent Is Eighth Lowest on Record.”   19 September 2017.;NASA.  “NASA Sees Tropical Storm Nicole Going ‘Extra-Tropical’.”   18 October 2016.

harvard-study-apple-iphones-sales-slows

harvard-study-apple-iphones-sales-slows

A Harvard study proved that Apple purposely slows down its older model iPhones to coincide with device releases and to boost sales of new models.

A long-circulating piece of technology lore surrounding the release of new iPhone holds that Apple unleashes furtive updates to dramatically slow existing models in the lead up to the release of a new version. An example of the rumor was illustrated in an episode of the Netflix series The Unbreakable Kimmy Schmidt: < If you were Apple, what tricks would you utilize to increase the sales of your latest product? If you know corporations, you’d know they use any possible trick they can as a generality to increase their profit: think of how huge a factor it would make in the sale of new iPhones if the old ones became slower. People have made the anecdotal observation that their Apple products become much slower right before the release of a new model. Now, a Harvard University study has done what any person with Google Trends could do, and pointed out that Google searches for “iPhone slow” spiked multiple times, just before the release of a new iPhone each time. > The blog, instead of linking to a peer-reviewed item published in an academic journal, cited a 29 July 2014 article published by a British tabloid. That source material similarly and repeatedly referenced a study: < A new study is backing up long held suspicions that Apple slows down older models of its iPhones to encourage users to buy a new release. The U.S. study analysed worldwide searches for ‘iPhone slow’ and found that the search term spiked significantly around the time of new iPhone launch … The study, compiled by Harvard University PhD student Laura Trucco, follows claims that the Cupertino-based company is deliberately sabotaging its old products. Writing for the New York Times, Sendhil Mullainathan, a professor of economics at Harvard, described the results as ‘striking’. > The site did link to a 26 July 2014 New York Times “Upshot” blog post authored by Mullainathan, in which he describes the “study” as a graduate student’s casual experiment using Google Trends: < Generally, my students know enough to ignore my grumbling. But in this instance, Laura Trucco, a Ph.D. student in economics at Harvard, followed a hunch. She wanted to see whether my experience was unique. But how? When people become frustrated with a slow phone, she reasoned, they search Google to figure out what to do about it. So, in theory, data on how often people search for “iPhone slow,” as provided by Google Trends, can measure the frustration globally. (Data for only the United States show similar results.) > In the Daily Mail, Mullainathan was quoted as having “described the results as ‘striking.'” However, the context offers a completely different picture: < Yes, phones feel slower over time as they hold more software and as our expectations of speed increase. But the spikes show that the feeling doesn’t grow gradually; it comes on suddenly in the days after a new phone is released. Yet that’s all it shows: People suddenly feel that their phone is slowing down. It doesn’t show that our iPhones actually became slower. Imagine that someone points out a buzzing sound in your office. Until then, you hadn’t noticed it. But now you can’t hear anything else. Perhaps this is the digital equivalent of that experience: Hearing about a new release makes you contemplate getting a new and faster phone. And you suddenly notice how slow your old phone is. > Mullainathan contrasted the Google Trends search with a similar one involving Android products, noting an absence of similar results and positing: < This data has an even more benign explanation. Every major iPhone release coincides with a major new operating system release. Though Apple would not comment on the matter, one could speculate — and many have — that a new operating system, optimized for new phones, would slow down older phones. This could also explain the Samsung-iPhone difference: Because only 18 percent of Android users have the latest operating systems on their phones, whereas 90 percent of iPhone users do, any slowdown from a new operating system would be naturally bigger for iPhones. The important distinction is of intent. In the benign explanation, a slowdown of old phones is not a specific goal, but merely a side effect of optimizing the operating system for newer hardware. Data on search frequency would not allow us to infer intent. No matter how suggestive, this data alone doesn’t allow you to determine conclusively whether my phone is actually slower and, if so, why. > The years-old clickbait was revived in September 2017 just as new iPhones were released, with no additional information substantiating the original claim. No Harvard study proves that Apple slows down iPhones down intentionally, and the original post that was rehashed for future articles seemed to contradict — if not outright disprove — the theory.

Mullainathan, Sendhil.  “Hold The Phone: A Big-Data Conundrum.”   New York Times’ The Upshot.  26 July 2014.;Zolfagharifard, Ellie.  “Does Apple Deliberately Slow Its Old Models Before A New Release? Searches For ‘iPhone Slow’ Show A Spike Ahead Of Launches.”   Daily Mail.  29 July 2014.;AnonGroup.org.  “Harvard Study Proves Apple Slows Down Old iPhones To Sell Millions Of New Models.”   21 September 2017.

In July 2017, President Trump dispatched federal investigators to the hamlet of Islamberg, New York, where they uncovered "America's worst nightmare".

On 18 July 2017, the Freedom Daily blog published an article with a terrifying sounding title: “Trump Sends Feds In To Raid NY’s Islamberg After 2 DECADES – Uncover America’s WORST Nightmare.” The page gained traction on social media thanks to its alarmist headline, but the text made no mention of President Trump or the Federal Bureau of Investigation. Instead, it contained a number of wild claims framed as “rumors”, most of which centered around the June 2017 arrest of a local resident on firearms charges: < There’s a mysterious hidden Muslim compound called Islamberg that’s nestled deep within the woods of the Catskill mountains in New York. The only way to access the 70-acre compound is through primitive dirt roads, where more than 100 Muslims live in seclusion away from the prying eyes of curious Americans. For over two decades, infidels have been prohibited from entering, as anyone attempting to enter will be “greeted” by armed Muslims patrolling a guard shack at the compound’s entry gate. Without access to the compound, there’s been no way to confirm rumors about the location being used as a training ground for Muslim terrorists. But after an alarming incident involving one of the Islamberg residents, police were finally able to obtain a warrant and raid the place. And what they discovered that these Muslims have been quietly plotting for years is nothing short of chilling. Locals in the area have often times reported the sounds of gunfire and explosions emanating from the compound, but because the Muslims weren’t necessarily breaking any laws, there was nothing that law enforcement could do except keep a close eye on the place from a distance … with a recent arrest of Islamberg resident Ramadan Abdullah who was recently caught trying to steal several cases of ammunition from a local mountain store in the area, authorities finally had their chance to obtain a search warrant for the compound, and what they discovered was nothing short of chilling. > The article continued with its editorializing and repetition (“nothing short of chilling”), finally concluding: < It’s absolutely ridiculous that Muslims in this country are allowed to have their own freaking jihadi compounds, where they’re actively training their residents on the necessary tactics to carry out terror attacks! While Americans are protected under the Constitution against illegal searches and seizures, when known freaking terrorists are leading these compounds, it’s time to stop letting these Muslims hide behind our laws and put them all in GITMO where they belong! > Islamberg, which is a small New York town inhabited by a few dozen Muslim families, has had a peaceful history since it was first founded in the 1980s by a group of people hoping to escape the crime and poverty that riddled Brooklyn at that time. However, it has been the subject of numerous threats, including a planned attack in 2015 by a one-time congressional candidate. The piece itself appears to be mostly about Ramadan Abdullah, a 64-year-old man who was indicted in July 2017 after an investigation into his alleged theft of four boxes of ammunition uncovered a storage locker filled with powerful weapons in the town of Union. A 14 June 2017 article reported: < Abdullah is charged with criminal possession of stolen property and five felony counts of criminal weapons possession. Law enforcement recovered 16 guns, more than 10,000 rounds of ammunition and dozens of high-capacity ammunition feeding devices. “There’s no indications there was a plan in place to commit an act of violence. However, it begs the question, what was he doing with all this and what were his intentions down the road?” said New York State Police Maj. Jim Barnes … Officials say there is no indication Abdullah posed an immediate threat to the area, but they said getting illegal weapons off the streets makes Broome County safer. > Despite the fact that the Freedom Daily blog was clearly trying to use Abdullah’s case as proof that Islamberg, New York, is a hotbed of terrorism training camps and militant leanings, it omitted an important detail: The weapons cache uncovered by police was not actually in Islamberg. The location of the investigation was provided as the “town of Union” and “Broome County” New York, while Islamberg is in the town of Tompkins in Delaware County, nearly an hour away by car: Geography made Freedom Daily’s claim that President Trump ordered a federal raid on Islamberg, New York implausible at best. We contacted the Delaware County Sheriff’s Office in an attempt to corroborate the claim. The office was familiar with the article and told us that there was “absolutely no truth” to its headline or claims. Similarly, New York State police were unaware of any connection. Although Abdullah was arrested on weapons charges in June 2017, the relevant events (such as the incident, searches, and indictment) occurred in a jurisdiction nearly an hour from Islamberg. No federal raid was conducted on the orders of President Trump or anywhere else. A search of news articles about Islamberg returned reports only about violent threats made toward Islamberg (not by anyone living there); credible violent threats toward the hamlet (including several threats and a planned anti-Islamberg rally just before this story appeared, as if to justify them) appear to be rather common.

Kearney, Laila.  “A Tranquil Muslim Hamlet In The Catskills – Until The Attack Plot.”   Reuters.  1 June 2015.;Kilgannon, Trish.  “Cache Of High-Powered Weapons Leads To Arrest Of Johnson City Man.”   Spectrum News.  14 June 2017.;Mann, Brian.  “Muslim Community In The Catskills Faces Right-Wing Fear, Threats.”   NCPR.  17 July 2017.;Obeidallah, Dean.  “Trump-Supporting Bigots To Target Upstate New York Muslims.”   The Daily Beast.  14 July 2017.;Obeidallah, Dean.  “America Snores When Christian Terrorist Threatens To Massacre Muslims.”   The Daily Beast.  18 May 2015.;Wikipedia.  “Islamberg, New York.”   Accessed 19 July 2017.;Reuters.  “Upstate New York Town Threatened By Arizona Man In Online Post: Reports.”   29 November 2015.;Freedom Daily.  “Trump Sends Feds In To Raid NY’s Islamberg After 2 Decades – Uncover America’s Worst Nightmare.”   18 July 2015.

babysitter-transported-to-hospital

babysitter-transported-to-hospital

A 31-year-old Cincinnati woman was taken to the hospital after the 14-month-old toddler she was babysitting got stuck in her vaginal cavity.

On 1 May 2017, the web site World News Daily Report (a notorious purveyor of fake news) posted an article seemingly reporting that a babysitter in Cincinnati, Ohio was admitted to a local hospital after paramedics found a toddler wedged in her vagina: < Latifah Brown called 911 around 9:30 PM last night, reporting that she had a baby stuck in her vagina. The operator first assumed that she was giving birth at home and dispatched an ambulance to the site. The paramedics had quite a surprise when they arrived on the site and saw what was actually happening. One of the paramedics, Brian Whitmore, related the incident in an interview with WBNS-10 TV. “The little boy wore a diaper and pyjamas, but he had his legs and abdomen stuck in the woman’s vagina.” The paramedics spent more than an hour on the site trying to release the child from his difficult position but were unable to get the toddler out. > After being transported to a hospital, where doctors successfully removed the baby (the article continues), Brown confessed to “deliberately inserting the child in her vaginal cavity” and was charged by police with “aggravated child neglect.” Not a word of which is true. As we have noted on many occasions (and as World News Daily Report states on its own disclaimer page), all of the content on the site is fictional: < All characters appearing in the articles in this website – even those based on real people –  are entirely fictional and any resemblance between them and any persons, living, dead, or undead is purely a miracle. >

WorldNewsDailyReport.com.  “Woman Transported to Hospital After Inserting a Baby in Her Vagina.”   1 May 2017.

pregnancy-testicular-cancer

pregnancy-testicular-cancer

David Mikkelson

A home pregnancy test can detect testicular cancer.

Back in November 2012, a Reddit user with the screen name ‘CappnPoopdeck’ posted a humorous rage comic to that site, one that detailed the experiences of a male friend who had jokingly taken a pregnancy test left in his medicine cabinet by an ex-girlfriend and surprisingly obtained a positive result: Although the post was intended as nothing more than a joke, the responses on Reddit soon took a serious turn, with CappnPoopdeck being advised, “If this is true, you should check yourself for testicular cancer. Seriously. Google it.” In fact, it turned out that pregnancy tests will record a positive result upon the detection of the hormone human chorionic gonadotropin (HCG), which is produced not only by pregnant women but also by some men with testicular tumors. CappnPoopdeck posted a follow-up comic informing Redditors that her friend had visited a doctor and found a small tumor in his right testicle (caught early enough to be treated immediately), and she thanked them for their helpful advice: However, although a home pregnancy test may be able to detect some forms of testicular cancer, this Redditor’s experience should not be taken to mean that such tests are a reliable method of detecting that disease. As the American Cancer Society has noted, they reliably apply in only a small minority of testicular cancer cases: < Just because the test helped this man get a positive cancer diagnosis doesn’t mean it’s a reliable tool everyone should use, according to the American Cancer Society.The organization put the question to Ted Gansler, director of medical content, who wrote that “only a small minority of men” with testicular cancer have HCG levels high enough to be detected by a home pregnancy test. He added that “several non-cancerous conditions can cause false positive results.” According to Gansler, “current evidence does not indicate that screening the general population of men with a urine test for HCG (or with urine or blood tests for any other tumour marker) can find testicular cancer early enough to reduce testicular cancer death rates.” One thing men can do is be on the lookout for lumps in the testicles and see your doctor if you find one. Testicle pain or swelling and heaviness or aching in the lower abdomen are also possible signs of testicular cancer. > In February 2014, a 21-year-old student also discovered he had testicular cancer, and obtained a potentially life-saving diagnosis, due to information about the disease he found on Reddit: < A 21-year-old student is thanking Reddit for saving his life, after a post on testicular cancer led to a life-saving diagnosis.Taylor “Chase” Tyree, a computer science major at the Colorado School of Mines, was reading the social media site Reddit when he came across a post from a user called “uniballer,” who talked about being diagnosed with testicular cancer and posted a photo of his removed testicle. Tyree found that the symptoms “uniballer” described were similar to ones he had been experiencing for months. Symptoms of testicular cancer can include swelling or finding a mass in the testicles. Testicular cancer is the most common cause of cancer for American males between the ages of 15 and 34, according to the Mayo Clinic. The day after reading the post Tyree went to the doctor to be checked and was immediately sent in for further tests. After giving Tyree an ultrasound, doctors found that Tyree had a cancerous mass in his left testicle. Just four days after seeing the Reddit post, Tyree had surgery to have his left testicle removed. >

Castillo, Michelle.  “Man’s Positive Pregnancy Test Leads to Cancer Diagnosis with Reddit’s Help.”   CBS News.  7 November 2012.;Kim, JuJu.  “Man Gets Treatment for Cancer Thanks to a Home Pregnancy Test and Reddit.”   Time.  8 November 2012.;Mohney, Gillian.  “‘Reddit Saved My Life’: Student Finds Testicular Cancer After Seeing Post.”   ABC News.  20 February 2014.;Weeks, Carly.  “Man Takes Pregnancy Test — With Surprising Results.”   The Globe and Mail.  8 November 2012.

cuba-cancer-vaccine

cuba-cancer-vaccine

Researchers in Cuba have discovered a cancer vaccine that is already saving thousands of people.

On 7 July 2017, TheNativePeople.net published a story reporting that Cuba has been evidently sitting on a cancer vaccine that has already cured thousands of people. In the article, which has since been shared thousands of times, the author writes: < There are many scientists who have dedicated their life in the search for the cure, and there are many promising natural alternatives that can replace chemotherapy and radiation in the future. The latest example is a research from Cuba, where a small group of scientists with a limited budget have been able to develop a vaccine against cancer that has cured more than 4000 people! The scientific community is impressed by the Cuban discovery, and many doctors claim that the cure for cancer has finally been found! The vaccine has produced incredible results even in the more advanced stages of cancer. It finally saw the light of day after 16 years of intense research, and doesn’t have any adverse side-effects. > The treatment this story highlights does indeed exist in Cuba. It’s a therapy (named CIMAvax) used to treat lung cancer, and which has begun being used in clinical trials in the United States. The treatment, contrary to the suggestion of the headline, is not meant to prevent the future occurrence of disease like a traditional vaccine. Vaccine, in this case, refers to the fact that CIMAvax provokes an immune response — as with a vaccine — which then signals a person’s own immune system to attack the cancer’s ability to grow (as opposed to inoculating against future outbreaks). As described in a November 2016 feature in The Atlantic: < [Cuban researchers used an] unusually powerful meningitis protein and fused it to part of another protein called epidermal growth factor, or EGF. EGF is important for controlling cancer because, as its name implies, EGF makes cells grow, and cancer is essentially cells growing out of control. When injected, this fused hybrid protein kicks a patient’s immune system into high gear (thanks to the meningitis) and targets cancer cells (thanks to the EGF). That’s how CIMAvax is supposed to work. It’s called a vaccine because like other vaccines, it stimulates the immune system, but it is actually used to treat rather than prevent lung cancer. > The drug, which was originally developed by the Cuban Ministry of Public Health in the 1990s, has undergone several animal and human clinical trials in Cuba, and is currently licensed there for stage IIIB/IV non-small-cell lung cancer. The most recent Cuban trial, a phase III study of 405 individuals with this kind of lung cancer, concluded: < Patients receiving at least 4 doses of the vaccine […] had a significant advantage in overall survival. Patients with high [concentrations of EGF in their system] had the largest benefit and [median survival time] after vaccination was 14.66 months. > While these results are promising, claims that “thousands” have been “cured” of cancer as a result of this drug are unsupported by published research, and appear to stem from reports that 5000 people have been treated with the drug since 2011. Indeed, improvements to survival were generally on the order of months, and around 20 percent of cases from these clinical trials showed no improvement compared to control groups. Due to regulations stemming from the United States embargo on Cuban goods, the drug has been unexplored in the United States until fairly recently. In late 2016, the Roswell Park Cancer Institute in Buffalo, New York received approval to embark on a collaboration with Cuban researchers to bring CIMAvax clinical trials to the U.S., capping a lengthy process to get approval from the Obama Administration that began in 2011. In addition to Cuba, CIMAvax has been used in Bosnia and Herzegovina, Colombia, Paraguay, and Peru. Michael Caligiuri of the American Association for Cancer Research told PBS Newshour that success in Cuba does not necessarily mean the drug will be met with similar success in the United States: < Whenever there’s an early evidence of efficacy in a single population, a single institution study, the chance that it will be replicated inter-institutionally is real, but not a given. > The U.S. trials began in January 2017, and researchers are currently recruiting participants. If the drug’s efficacy is demonstrated by the standards of the U.S. Food and Drug administration, Roswell Park Cancer Institute scientist Kevin Lee says it could potentially change the way in which doctors approach cancer treatment by targeting not the cancer itself, but by changing a body’s ability to contain a cancer that it was previously unable to combat: < There is an idea that’s developing of converting cancer into a chronic disease. We give you a pill that you take every day, and it allows you to live a perfectly normal life. > While the drug is real and has shown promise against a specific kind of lung cancer, claims that it is a blanket “cure” for all of cancer overstate both the scope of the drug and the nature of its clinical success. Therefore, we rate that claim that Cuban researchers already have a cancer vaccine that has cured thousands of people as a mixture.

The Native People.  “Cuba Found a Cancer Vaccine! More Than 4 Thousand People Have Already Been Cured by It!”   7 July 2017.;Zhang, Sarah.  “Cuba’s Innovative Cancer Vaccine Is Finally Coming to America.”   The Atlantic.  7 November 2016.;Rodriguez, Pedro, C., et al.  “Clinical Development and Perspectives of CIMAvax EGF, Cuban Vaccine for Non-Small-Cell Lung Cancer Therapy”   MEDICC Review.  Winter 2010.;Ramos, Tania C, et al.  “Vaccine Profile CIMAvax EGF (EGF-P64K) Vaccine for the Treatment of Non-small-cell Lung Cancer.”   Expert Review of Vaccines.  20 August 2015.;Roswell Park Cancer Institute.  “About Roswell Park’s Cuban Collaboration.”   Accessed 26 July 2017.;PBS Newshour.  “This Cuban Lung Cancer Drug Is Giving Some U.S. Patients Hope.”   9 May 2017.

tom-hanks-t-shirt

tom-hanks-t-shirt

A July 2017 Facebook post shows Tom Hanks wearing a t-shirt bearing a number of liberal slogans.

In July 2017, Facebook user Andre Lightner posted a photograph appearing to show the actor Tom Hanks wearing a t-shirt emblazoned with a series of liberal and environmentalist slogans: “Science is Real – Black Lives Matter – No Human is Illegal – Love is Love – Women’s Rights Are Human Rights – Kindness is Everything.” As many commenters have pointed out, and has you may have noticed, the lettering on this t-shirt is conspicuously straight, considering it’s supposedly being worn across Hanks’ chest. But in this case, even the t-shirt itself has been (fairly convincingly) digitally added to the image.  In fact, this is the latest in a series of social media posts to falsely present Tom Hanks championing various slogans using a doctored version of a real photograph. The original picture was posted by Hanks himself to Facebook and Twitter on 29 June 2015. In it, he’s wearing a United States soccer team jersey to support the women’s national team ahead of their World Cup semi-final match against Germany the following day: < Fake turf or not, I’m full Bosom Buds if coach Ellis needs me. No yellow cards! Hanx pic.twitter.com/4eT5cYzmjD — Tom Hanks (@tomhanks) June 29, 2015 > Hanks was referring to a controversy leading up to the 2015 World Cup, which was hosted by Canada and the first to be played on artificial turf rather than grass. A group of international players (including members of the U.S. squad) took legal action to prevent this, because playing on artificial turf is widely considered to increase the risk of injury. The lawsuit was later dropped. The actor also referred to Bosom Buddies, a 1980s sitcom in which he and Peter Scolari played young men pretending to be women in order to stay in a cheap Manhattan apartment. Since then, the image has been doctored to show Hanks championing environmentalist causes, including the April 2017 March for Science: < Please Support @ScienceMarchDC in ur state! April 22nd is Earth Day & there is ‘NO PLANET B’! Tom Hanks agrees! #SaveOurPlanet @MrSpock2017 pic.twitter.com/ns6Ta2Inac — Jayne ?Resist? (@WienerJaMD) April 18, 2017 > < Tom Hanks gets it! March for Science!@ScienceMarchDC @ACSNatlMtg #ACSSanFran pic.twitter.com/UQA2qzpJx3 — Paul Dauenhauer (@pauldauenhauer) April 3, 2017 >  Hanks has broad appeal and a reputation as a likeable person, and he is actually a prominent celebrity supporter of environmentalist and liberal causes, such as same-sex marriage and LGBT rights. This probably explains why he — and his shirt — continue to be a blank canvas for creative image editors promoting causes and selling merchandise.

Rogers, Martin.   “U.S. Women: Men Would Never Play World Cup on Turf.”    USA Today.   5 June 2015.;Queerty.   “Tom Hanks Accepts LGBT Award and Shows Why He’s the Best-Liked Man in Show Business.”    Queerty.com.   10 November 2015.

dishwasher-hurricane

dishwasher-hurricane

Dishwashers are a great place to store valuable documents and photographs during hurricanes or flooding.

On 6 September 2017, as Hurricane Irma swept across the Caribbean and towards southern Florida, a Facebook user posted a claim that a dishwasher is an ideal spot to hide valuables during a hurricane: < FLORIDA PEEPS! GOOD ADVICE! EMPTY YOUR DISHWASHER AND PUT ANYTHING YOU WANT TO PRESERVE IN THERE. It’s waterproof and secured to cabinets so it’s more likely to survive a storm. TELL YOUR FRIENDS. > The post had racked up over a million shares by 8 September 2017. The advice even wound up on several news roundups of “hurricane hacks“: < -Your dishwasher can be a waterproof safe: It’s sealed to keep water in, so it should do just fine keeping it out too. Just make sure all your dishes are taken out before loading up important documents or belongings. > The post did not cite any manufacturer, disaster expert, or government agency and the reasoning provided (“it’s secured to cabinets”) sounded more like observation than credible information. We contacted the dishwasher manufacturer Maytag and Roto-Rooter plumbing company for further information, but have not yet received a response. However, the owner of an appliance repair shop told The Tampa Bay Times in September 2017 that storing valuables in the dishwasher during a flood is a bad idea: < The dishwasher is a safe place to keep valuables you don’t want to get wet It’s not a good idea to keep valuables in your dishwasher, said Ralph Feldkamp, the owner of Ralph’s Appliance & Air Conditioning Repair in St. Petersburg. Dishwashers don’t keep water out. Feldkamp said if your home is flooded, so will your dishwasher. He said he sees a lot of flooded dishwashers in Shore Acres. The low-lying neighborhood in northeast St. Petersburg is one of the most flood-prone areas in Tampa Bay. Besides flooding, extreme wind can tear apart the interior of your residence, including appliances. “If your dishwasher gets ripped then your valuables are going to be floating around the neighborhood,” he said. There’s also the possibility that your dishwasher will turn on during the storm, which would not bode well for your valuables. > And in August 2006, New Orleans’ Times-Picayune carried a reader-submitted cautionary tale about storing important things in the dishwasher during flooding: < Regarding the tip, “Pack your photographs and important things that you can’t fit into the car in Ziploc bags and put them all in the dishwasher and lock the door, because it’s the only thing that’s waterproof in your house”: That doesn’t work. I put dishes I wanted to save in my dishwasher. They did not break, but the mud and water in St. Bernard Parish managed to get inside. Photographs stored in a dishwasher would just be little pieces of white paper. Some things I put in Ziploc bags were wet and others were dry. If you put things in Ziploc bags, make sure there are no pinholes in the bag. The only way to guarantee that pictures will survive is to take them with you. Or scan them into a computer and send copies to several out-of-town friends before you evacuate. > When similar advice appeared on the reddit forum r/LifeProTips, one user responded with another personal anecdote about losing valuables this way: By contrast, we were unable to locate any stories of people successfully protecting their belongings from flood by storing them in a dishwasher.

Earl, Jennifer.  “7 Household Hacks To Help You Prepare For Hurricane Irma.”   CBS News.  7 September 2017.;Graves, Allison.  “Hurricane Irma: 5 Myths About Hurricane Prep To Forget.”   Tampa Bay Times.  7 September 2017.;Perry, Zack and Laura Harris.  “Hurricane Hacks: Ways To Keep Yourself Prepared During Hurricane Irma.”   WFTS.  5 September 2017.;Sidorowicz, Josh.  “4 Household Hacks To Make Sure You’re Hurricane Ready.”   WTLV-TV.  6 September 2017.;NOLA.com.  “Advice For Storing, Preserving Valuables During Hurricane.”   16 August 2006.

hennepin-county-flag

hennepin-county-flag

On 14 August 2017, protesters removed and destroyed the county flag from the Hennepin County, Minnesota jail, and temporarily replaced it with an Antifa flag.

On 15 August 2017, the conservative Gateway Pundit web site reported that a group of protesters outside the Hennepin County jail in Minneapolis, Minnesota, had removed the county’s flag and erected one of their own – bearing the insignia of the anti-fascist “antifa” movement. < Far left agitators marched through the streets of Minneapolis, Minnesota on Monday night in a solidarity protest with Charlottesville, Virginia. The far left protesters replaced the Hennepin County flag with the Antifa flag at the Hennepin County Government Center. > Two days later, the right-wing CNS News web site further reported that the same protesters had burned the Hennepin County flag which they removed from a flag-pole outside the building. < Leftist “Antifa” protesters stormed a county government building in Minnesota, seized and burned the county flag – then replaced it with an Antifa flag – on Monday. > These posts use hyperbolic language and slightly exaggerate events — for example, the protestors did not “storm” the building, but rather protested outside it. There was an anti-racist protest in Minneapolis on 14 August 2017, which was organized to show solidarity with the counter-protestors at a white supremacist rally in Charlottesvile, Virginia two days earlier. Protestors did indeed remove a county flag  and replace it with an antifa flag. According to the Minneapolis-based Star Tribune, the demonstration involved: “the Anti-War Committee, Students for a Democratic Society, New North, the Minnesota Immigrant Rights Action Committee and other groups.” Video posted to Twitter by Leah Soule clearly shows some of the protesters erecting the antifa flag outside the Hennepin County Public Safety Facility (which includes the county jail).  < #Antifa flags replaces the Hennepin county one at #Charlottesville solitary action pic.twitter.com/2d7nv5Umeg — Leah Soule (@SouleLeah) August 14, 2017 >  In a statement, a spokesperson for Hennepin County confirmed the accuracy of these claims, but noted that the incident lasted for less than half an hour: < …There were protestors in front of the Hennepin County Public Safety Facility (jail) on Aug. 14. At roughly 7 p.m., the Hennepin County flag was taken down by someone in that group. It was damaged. The other flag was erected. It was up for less than 30 minutes. It was then replaced with a new Hennepin County flag. > The spokesperson further clarified that it was, indeed, protesters who destroyed the Hennepin County flag. According to the Minneapolis Police Department, no arrests were made at the protest, and there is no ongoing investigation.Â

Pheifer, Pat.  “Minneapolis Anti-Racism Rally Draws Hundreds, Blocks Streets.”  Star Tribune.  14 August 2017.

duty-obligation-guard-tomb-unknown-soldier

duty-obligation-guard-tomb-unknown-soldier

David Mikkelson

List describes the duties and obligations of honor guards at the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier.

As a society, we have long observed traditional, solemn funereal ceremonies as a means of remembering, honoring, and mourning those who have passed on from this life to whatever lies beyond. As a nation, we observe some very formalized rituals as a means of affording our very highest honors to members of the armed forces who have died in the service of their country, particularly those who have fallen in wartime. Military funerals with honor guards, flag-draped coffins, salutes, and burials in cemeteries set aside for veterans are all symbols by which we honor and acknowledge our gratitude to those who have made the ultimate sacrifice for their country. There is perhaps no more potent symbol of this sacrifice than the “unknown soldier,” the serviceman who has died in combat but whose remains are not identifiable. He cannot be returned to his home, his friends and loved ones cannot know for certain how or when (or even if) he died, he cannot be placed to rest in a site of his own choosing. He remains, perpetually, a soldier who not only gave up his life for his country, but his very identity as well. That loss of identity makes the unknown soldier a powerful symbol, however — because he is no longer an individual, he stands for the purest ideals of courage, valor, and sacrifice and serves as a noble and selfless representation of service to one’s country. We acknowledge our unidentified fallen heroes with a special place of reverence in our most honored of burial grounds: the Tomb of the Unknowns (also known as the Tomb of the Unknown Soldier) in Arlington National Cemetery (ANC), where in 1921 we first laid to rest “In Honored Glory An American Soldier Known But To God.” Although we cannot inter all of our unidentifed war dead in Arlington, we nonetheless honor them all by including the remains of three representative soldiers of unknown identity who died in foreign wars (World War I, World War II, and the Korean War) there. (Beginning in 1984 the tomb also held the remains of a serviceman killed in the Vietnam War, but after DNA testing confirmed his identity in 1998, his remains were disinterred and returned to his family. The crypt of the Vietnam Unknown has remained empty ever since.) The most visible honorific symbol associated with the Tomb of the Unknowns is that the site is guarded around the clock, every day of the year, by specially trained members of the Third United States Infantry Regiment (also known as the “Old Guard“). The Sentinels who guard the Tomb must be exemplary in discipline, dress, and bearing; thoroughly knowlegeable with the history of their unit, the Tomb of the Unknowns, Arlington National Cemetery (and those interred there), and the U.S. Army; and able to execute a variety of ceremonial rites flawlessly and with precision. Someone apparently wanted to highlight the special qualities and training required to be a guard at Tomb of the Unknowns by creating a message that became widely circulated online: < HONOR GUARD AT ARLINGTON NATIONAL CEMETERY INTERESTING FACTS ABOUT THE TOMB OF THE UNKNOWNS 1. How many steps does the guard take during his walk across the tomb of the Unknowns and why? 21 steps. It alludes to the twenty-one gun salute, which is the highest honor given any military or foreign dignitary. 2. How long does he hesitate after his about face to begin his return walk and why? 21 seconds for the same reason as answer number 1. 3. Why are his gloves wet? His gloves are moistened to prevent his losing his grip on the rifle. 4. Does he carry his rifle on the same shoulder all the time, and if not, why not? He carries the rifle on the shoulder away from the tomb After his march across the path, he executes an about face, and moves the rifle to the outside shoulder. 5. How often are the guards changed? Guards are changed every thirty minutes, twenty-four hours a day, 365 days a year. 6. What are the physical traits of the guard limited to? For a person to apply for guard duty at the tomb, he must be between 5′ 10″ and 6′ 2″ tall and his waist size cannot exceed 30.” Other requirements of the Guard: They must commit 2 years of life to guard the tomb, live in a barracks under the tomb, and cannot drink any alcohol on or off duty for the rest of their lives. They cannot swear in public for the rest of their lives and cannot disgrace the uniform {fighting} or the tomb in any way. After two years, the guard is given a wreath pin that is worn on their lapel signifying they served as guard of the tomb. There are only 400 presently worn. The guard must obey these rules for the rest of their lives or give up the wreath pin. The shoes are specially made with very thick soles to keep the heat and cold from their feet. There are metal heel plates that extend to the top of the shoe in order to make the loud click as they come to a halt. There are no wrinkles, folds or lint on the uniform. Guards dress for duty in front of a full-length mirror. The first six months of duty a guard cannot talk to anyone, nor watch TV. All off duty time is spent studying the 175 notable people laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery. A guard must memorize who they are and where they are interred. Among the notables are: President Taft, Joe E. Lewis (the boxer), and Medal of Honor winner Audie Murphy (the most decorated soldier of WWII) of Hollywood fame. Every guard spends five hours a day getting his uniforms ready for guard duty. > This list is a mixture of fact and fiction, which we attempt to sort out below: < 1. How many steps does the guard take during his walk across the tomb of the Unknowns and why? 21 steps. It alludes to the twenty-one gun salute, which is the highest honor given any military or foreign dignitary. > The guards do make 21-step walks past the Tomb of the Unknowns because 21 is considered a number of special significance, a topic discussed on our page about the origins of the 21-gun salute. < 2. How long does he hesitate after his about face to begin his return walk and why? 21 seconds for the same reason as answer number 1. > This is a somewhat true but incomplete statement. The guard does not execute an about-face, and there is more involved in the procedure than is described here. As another site describes the process, the guard performs his movements according to the following pattern: < 3. Why are his gloves wet? His gloves are moistened to prevent his losing his grip on the rifle. > According to the FAQ on the web site of the Society of the Honor Guard — Tomb of the Unknown Soldier, this is correct. < 4. Does he carry his rifle on the same shoulder all the time, and if not, why not? He carries the rifle on the shoulder away from the tomb After his march across the path, he executes an about face, and moves the rifle to the outside shoulder. > As noted above, the guard shifts his rifle prior to each 21-step walk to ensure that it is always carried on his outside shoulder, the one away from the Tomb (“to signify that the sentinel stands between the tomb and any threat”). < 5. How often are the guards changed? Guards are changed every thirty minutes, twenty-four hours a day, 365 days a year. > From 1926 through 1937, the Tomb was guarded only during daylight hours. Ever since 1937, the Tomb has been continuously guarded 24 hours a day, every day of the year. Tomb guards are changed every thirty minutes between 8 AM and 7 PM during the period from early Spring to early Autumn (April 1 through September 30), and every hour between 8 AM to 5 PM the rest of the year. At all other times (i.e., while the cemetery is closed), the guard is changed every two hours. < 6. What are the physical traits of the guard limited to? For a person to apply for guard duty at the tomb, he must be between 5′ 10″ and 6′ 2″ tall and his waist size cannot exceed 30. > This is also true, according to the ANC web site, which notes that “Each soldier must be in superb physical condition, possess an unblemished military record and be between 5 feet, 10 inches and 6 feet, 4 inches tall, with a proportionate weight and build.” < They must commit 2 years of life to guard the tomb, live in a barracks under the tomb, and cannot drink any alcohol on or off duty for the rest of their lives. > Even the Old Guard doesn’t regulate the off-duty lives of its members so stringently! Sentinels at the Tomb do not have to commit to serving there for any fixed period of time, and the average tour of duty is only about half the two year period claimed here. Like most servicemen, Tomb guards may live either on-base (at nearby Fort Myer) or off-base in housing of their choosing. There are no restrictions on guards’ off-duty drinking. < They cannot swear in public for the rest of their lives and cannot disgrace the uniform (fighting) or the tomb in any way. After two years, the guard is given a wreath pin that is worn on their lapel signifying they served as guard of the tomb. There are only 400 presently worn. The guard must obey these rules for the rest of their lives or give up the wreath pin. > The Tomb Guard Identification Badge, first awarded in 1957, is a honor for which a guard qualifies by “flawlessly performing his duty for several months” and passing a test, not something simply handed out to everyone who serves for a given period of time: < Once the sentinel has completed his or her training, he or she is examined formally for proficiency in performing the duties and in knowledge of ANC. He or she must first pass a written examination of 100 questions about ANC and then be evaluated on proficiency in keeping watch at the Tomb of the Unknowns. Upon successful completion, the soldier is awarded a temporary Tomb Guard’s Badge at a ceremony presided over by the company commander. The Badge is one of the Army’s higher honors and can be taken away from the soldier if he or she does not continue to maintain the highest military standards. > The 500th Tomb Guard Identification Badge was awarded in early 2002, and the total number of recipients is now about 525. The award is, as its name states, a badge worn on the pocket of a uniform jacket, not a pin worn in the lapel. Although the claim that guards “cannot swear in public for the rest of their lives” is fallacious, there is some truth to the notion that the Tomb Guard Identification Badge can be taken away, even after the recipient has left the service. According to Old Guard Public Affairs: < The Tomb Guard Identification Badge is one of the least awarded badges in the Army, second only to the Astronaut Badge. Since the sentinels are held to such a high standard, if they ever do anything that is deemed behavior unbecoming a Tomb Guard or brings dishonor upon the Tomb, their badges may be revoked, even after [the sentinels] have left active duty military service. > As of early 2002, there had been nine revocations of the Tomb Guard Identification Badge. < The shoes are specially made with very thick soles to keep the heat and cold from their feet. There are metal heel plates that extend to the top of the shoe in order to make the loud click as they come to a halt. There are no wrinkles, folds or lint on the uniform. Guards dress for duty in front of a full-length mirror. > The FAQ at www.tombguard.org also addresses this topic: < The shoes are specially made with very thick soles to keep the heat and cold from their feet. There are metal heel plates that extend to the top of the shoe in order to make the loud click as they come to a halt. There are no wrinkles, folds or lint on the uniform. Guards dress for duty in front of a full-length mirror. The shoes are standard issue military dress shoes. They are built up so the sole and heel are equal in height. This allows the Sentinel to stand so that his back is straight and perpendicular to the ground. A side effect of this is that the Sentinel can “roll” on the outside of the build up as he walks down the mat. This allows him to move in a fluid fashion. If he does this correctly, his hat and bayonet will appear to not “bob” up and down with each step. It gives him a more formal and smooth look to his walk, rather than a “marching” appearance. The soles have a steel tip on the toe and a “horseshoe” steel plate on the heel. This prevents wear on the sole and allows the Sentinel to move smoothly during his movements when he turns to face the Tomb and then back down the mat. > < The first six months of duty a guard cannot talk to anyone, nor watch TV. All off duty time is spent studying the 175 notable people laid to rest in Arlington National Cemetery. A guard must memorize who they are and where they are interred. Every guard spends five hours a day getting his uniforms ready for guard duty. > A Tomb guard’s behavior is not so stringently regulated that he is prohibited from speaking to anyone for a full six months (someone seems to have confused the Old Guard with a monastery!), and guards may do whatever they want (including watching TV) during their off-duty hours. But since any soldier wishing to become a sentinel must undergo rigorous training, including several hours a day of marching, rifle drill and uniform preparation, and every tomb sentinel is expected to be completely versed in the history of both the tomb and of Arlington National Cemetery (including knowing how to find the graves of all the prominent person buried in the cemetery), they don’t necessarily have a lot of free time to devote to recreational activities. < Among the notables are: President Taft, Joe E. Lewis (the boxer), and Medal of Honor winner Audie Murphy (the most decorated soldier of WWII) of Hollywood fame. > Joe Louis (aka “The Brown Bomber”), Heavyweight Champion of the World between 1937 and 1949, is the boxer interred at Arlington National Cemetery. (Joe E. Lewis, the comedian, is buried in New Jersey.) Although Joe Louis served in the Army during World War II he did not meet the technical requirements for burial at Arlington, but he is interred there because President Reagan waived the requirements when Louis died in 1981. We close here with a bit of trivia suggested by the above item: Although serving as President of the United States qualifies one to be buried at Arlington National Cemetery, only two former Presidents are interred there: William Howard Taft and John F. Kennedy.

Colbert, Sgt. Jamelle.  “Tomb of the Unknowns Awards 500th Tomb Guard Identification Badge.”   The Pentagram.  11 January 2002.;Dyson, Spc. Eric.  “A Half-Century of Solemn Duty.”   The Pentagram.  3 April 1998.;Dyson, Spc. Eric.  “Tomb Guards Plan Reunion Weekend.”   The Pentagram.  27 March 1998.;Nguyen, Lan.  “A Final Salute; Sentry Set a Record at Tomb of the Unknowns.”   The Washington Post.  7 March 1996  (p. V1).;Riskind, Jonathan.  “An Honor to Serve.”   The Columbus Dispatch.  26 May 1997  (p. B3).

aclu-travel-warning-texas

aclu-travel-warning-texas

In May 2017, the ACLU issued a warning for Americans traveling to Texas.

In May 2017, we began receiving e-mails from readers asking if it was true that the American Civil Liberties Union had issued a travel warning or alert for the state of Texas: < Saw this on facebook. Did the ACLU really post a travel warning about traveling through Texas? > Out of context, the claim sounds potentially like fake news. But it is easily verified via the ACLU’s social media accounts, where posts reference the warning: < Since the passage of SB4, we must issue a travel advisory to anyone planning to travel to Texas. What you need to know and what you can do. pic.twitter.com/pl8Zzaz5K8 — ACLU National (@ACLU) May 9, 2017 > The ACLU linked to 9 May 2017 Quartz item, which reported the 7 May 2017 passage of a law enabling police to inquire about the immigration status of anyone they detained, even those who have been stopped for minor traffic violations: < SB4, as the law is known, also requires local law-enforcement officials to cooperate with federal immigration authorities who request they detain people suspected of being in the US illegally. The ACLU notice mimics the travel advisories published by the US State Department, designed to warn or alert Americans of potential dangers in foreign countries. The ACLU has only used this tactic once before, warning people about traveling to Arizona in 2010, after the state passed an even harsher provision, requiring officers to ask for immigration documents. The law resulted in a six-year legal battle eventually resolved in 2016, and hit the state with costs of boycotts and lost business. > Before the ACLU issued a national alert, its Texas branch published a blog post explaining why it opposes the law: < … SB4 will turn [Texas] into a “show me your papers” state, where any encounter with local law enforcement can turn into a citizenship interrogation. It will encourage local police without a single minute of immigration enforcement training on their resumes to profile skin tones and accents and languages. Mandatory detainers will clog our jails. The border checkpoint will be everywhere. … SB4 will drive witnesses and victims of crime into the shadows. Fearing deportation, survivors of domestic violence and rape will let their abusers walk free. Knowing this, sheriffs from Travis, Dallas, Harris, Bexar and El Paso Counties, along with police chiefs from Dallas, Houston, Austin, Arlington, Fort Worth and San Antonio begged the legislature not to pass this awful law. But the experience and informed opinions of Texas’s law enforcement leaders carried no weight with Governor Abbott and his warmed-up pen. > SB4 is scheduled to be implemented in Texas on 1 September 2017.Â

Burke, Terri.  “This Is Not The Texas I Know.”   American Civil Liberties Union of Texas.  8 May 2017.;Jarvis, Jenny.  “Texas’ New Ban On ‘Sanctuary Cities’ Could Put Police In Jail If They Fail To Enforce Immigration Holds.”   Los Angeles Times.  4 May 2017.;Kozlowska, Hanna.  “The ACLU Issues A Travel Advisory’ For Texas After The State Bans Sanctuary.”   Quartz.  9 May 2017.;Tinsley, Anna M.  “ACLU Warns Travelers About Visiting Texas.”   Star-Telegram.  9 May 2017.;American Civil Liberties Union.  “SB4: What You Need To Know.”   Accessed 10 May 2017.;LegiScan.  “Texas Senate Bill 4.”   Accessed 10 May 2017.

is-manuka-honey-better-than-all-known-antibiotics

is-manuka-honey-better-than-all-known-antibiotics

Manuka honey, as a topical treatment, is better than all known antibiotics.

MOSTLY FALSE

Despite celebrity endorsements from Gwyneth Paltrow and other actresses-turned-lifestyle brands, humans have used honey as a treatment for skin ailments and infections for thousands of years. Early practitioners may not have known why, but, later scientific discoveries elucidated one of the primary reasons behind honey’s success as an antiseptic — it naturally produces hydrogen peroxide when diluted, per a 2014 review paper: < All undiluted raw honeys restrict microbial growth due to their osmolarity and acidity. On dilution many honeys produce low, sustained levels of hydrogen peroxide by the oxidation of glucose by glucose oxidase. > Since 1989, however, a growing body of work has suggested that one particular kind of honey called manuka honey, found in New Zealand and Australia and derived from bees that feed on the manuka bush (Leptospermum scoparium), appears to have additional antiseptic and antibiotic properties likely attributed to something beyond the hydrogen peroxide. Later research, beginning in 2008, determined that the main compound responsible for this increased antimicrobial activity is a chemical called methylglyoxal (MGO), a byproduct of the bee’s honey production. Some manuka honey contains up to 100 times more MGO than other honeys. It is against this backdrop of scientific research that viral news stories and specialty honey distributors frequently extol the virtues of manuka honey. Yet, exaggerations are frequent. In viral post from January 2017, the website Healthy Holistic Living made this claim of the honey: < Not all honey is created equal. While the benefits of raw, unprocessed honey have been well-documented over the centuries, Australian researchers have found one type of honey, called Manuka honey, to be better than all known antibiotics. > That story, as well as a similar post on the missed-bee-pun-opportunity website bewellhub.com from October 2017, highlights research from October 2010 and January 2015 (not exactly breaking science news) to suggest manuka honey has potential to avoid antibiotic resistance. They claim it could fight some strains of Staphylococcus aureus, which can develop marked resistance to antibiotics in the form of MRSA, or methicillin-resistant Staphylococcus aureus: < In the aforementioned studies, Australian researchers found that the honey killed every bacteria or pathogen it was tested on […]. The honey can be applied topically to help fight against infections of the skin, cuts and insect bites, or taken internally. The most exciting difference with the manuka honey that was tested is that none of superbugs killed by the honey were able to build up immunity, a common problem with today’s antibiotics. > The older 2010 study, published in the European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases, is a preliminary, but not definitive, suggestion that treating wounds with honey does not result in honey-resistant bacteria, but this research was not performed on human test subjects, and was instead performed using the tightly controlled conditions of a petri dish: < Two cultures of bacteria from reference collections […] and four cultures isolated from wounds […] were exposed to sub-lethal concentrations of manuka honey in continuous and stepwise training experiments to determine whether the susceptibility to honey diminished. Reduced susceptibilities to manuka honey in the test organisms during long-term stepwise resistance training were found, but these changes were not permanent and honey-resistant mutants were not detected. The risk of bacteria acquiring resistance to honey will be low if high concentrations are maintained clinically. > While it is accurate to suggest this study showed that manuka honey “killed every bacteria or pathogen it was tested” on, it would be inaccurate to suggest that evidence from two specific strains of bacteria and four heterogenous samples taken from wounds suggest broad superiority over antibiotics in all cases. In fact, much of the current research on manuka honey is focused on the possibility that, medically, it could be used in combination with other antibiotics, primarily for hard to fight infections like MRSA. The more recent 2015 study highlighted in the bewellhub.com post and published in the journal Frontiers in Microbiology, primarily addressed that issue looking at a variety of Staphylococcus infections: < We demonstrate that manuka-type honey combined with [one of four tested] antibiotics frequently produces a synergistic effect. In some cases when synergism was not observed, there was a significant enhancement in antibiotic susceptibility. Some strains that were highly resistant to an antibiotic when present alone become sensitive to clinically achievable concentrations when combined with honey. However, not all of the S. aureus strains tested responded in the same way to these combinational treatments. Our findings support the use of NZ manuka-type honeys in clinical treatment against S. aureus-related infections and extend their potential use as an antibiotic adjuvant in combinational therapy. > This study, like the one discussed before, was done using cultures, and was not performed on actual human subjects, as well. In a 2014 paper reviewing the available science for manuka honey as a topical treatment for infections, the authors suggest that there is certainly potential for manuka honey, but more human trials will need to be conducted to get a clearer picture and gain widespread acceptance: < Despite accumulating evidence of the efficacy of manuka honey in inhibiting wound pathogens in vitro, substantive in vivo data are required because practitioners influenced by evidence-based medicine are likely to need objective clinical evidence before they risk adding manuka honey to their armament as a first-choice topical treatment. Since laboratory studies carry little weight in the hierarchy of evidence, suitable funds must be found to support clinical investigation. An effective topical antimicrobial could have a significant impact on the fight to limit the spread of MRSA in healthcare establishments. > While there is growing evidence to suggest an important role for manuka honey for wound care and recalcitrant infections, the research is too preliminary and largely untested on humans to truly know its complete potential, and it is certainly too preliminary to suggest it is “better than all known antibiotics.” As such, we rank this claim as mostly false.

Israili, Zafar.  “Antimicrobial Properties of Honey.”   American Journal of Therapeutics. &nbsp. July/August 2014.;Allen, K. L., et al.  “A Survey of the Antibacterial Activity of Some New Zealand Honeys.”   Journal of Pharmacy and Pharmacology. &nbsp. December 1991.;Allen, K. L., et al.  “Isolation by Hplc and Characterisation of the Bioactive Fraction of New Zealand Manuka (leptospermum Scoparium) Honey.”   Carbohydrate Research. &nbsp. 17 March 2008.;Mavric, E., et al.  “Identification and Quantification of Methylglyoxal as the Dominant Antibacterial Constituent of Manuka (Leptospermum Scoparium) Honeys from New Zealand.”   Carbohydrate Research. &nbsp. April 2008.;Healthy Holistic Living.  “Study: Manuka Honey Kills More Bacteria Than All Available Antibiotics”   January 2017.;Be Well Hub.  “Researchers: Manuka Honey May Kill Far More Bacteria than Available Antibiotics.”   16 October 2017.;Cooper. R. A., et al.  “Absence of Bacterial Resistance to Medical-Grade Manuka Honey.”   European Journal of Clinical Microbiology & Infectious Diseases. &nbsp. October 2010.;Liu, Michael, et al.  “Antibiotic-specific Differences in the Response of Staphylococcus Aureus to Treatment With Antimicrobials Combined With Manuka Honey.”   Frontiers in Microbiology. &nbsp. 27 January 2015.;Cooper, R, and Jenkins, R.  “Are There Feasible Prospects for Manuka Honey as an Alternative to Conventional Antimicrobials?”   Expert Review of Anti-infective Therapy. &nbsp. 10 January 2014.

baby-found-grenfell-tower

baby-found-grenfell-tower

A baby was found alive in Grenfell Tower 12 days after a major fire in June 2017.

On 26 June 2017, the Metro-UK web site published a fake story claiming that police had found a baby alive in the Grenfell Tower apartment building in London, 12 days after a devastating fire that killed at least 79 people. < A baby has miraculously survived twelve days after a horrific blaze at the Grenfell Tower in London left 79 people dead. The baby’s voice was heard when Detectives visited the scene for an ongoing investigation.  > The article goes on to quote Detective Superintendent Fiona McCormack as saying “The baby was crying when we rushed in. It was on the 16th floor.” Fiona McCormack is a Detective Superintendent for the Metropolitan Police, but this is a fabricated quote. Metro-UK also claimed that London Mayor Sadiq Khan and the police had confirmed the baby’s rescue on Twitter. Both these claims are also false. One clue as to the source’s unreliability is the “Breaking News” graphic that accompanies the story on the Metro-UK web site. The graphic was lifted from the BBC, as this example shows. The fake story has prompted a backlash in the UK. The Metro.co.uk web site emphasized that it had no connection whatsoever to the story, or the Metro-uk.com web site. However, it inaccurately claimed that Metro-uk.com had been started “in order to spread [the] extremely distressing hoax.” In fact, Metro-uk.com was set up in October 2016. The Daily Mirror cited several examples of unsuspecting readers who believed the hoax, which came at a time when many among the British public were hoping for good news in the aftermath of a tragedy that had dominated British current affairs since it took place on 14 June 2017. The Metropolitan Police have said they believe at least 79 people died in the fire. As of 24 June 2017, 18 victims had been formally identified.

Nagesh, Ashitha.  “People Are Spreading Distressing Hoax Stories About a Baby Being Found Alive in Grenfell Tower.”  Metro.co.uk.  26 June 2017.;Mulroy, Zahra.  “Upsetting Lies Are Spreading About a Baby in Grenfell Tower and Thousands of People are Falling For it.”  Daily Mirror.  26 June 2017.;Cundy, Commander Stuart.  “UPDATE: Grenfell Tower Fire Investigation.”  Metropolitan Police.  23 June 2017.;Metropolitan Police.  “UPDATE: Number of Victims of Grenfell Tower Fire Formally Identified is 18.”  Metropolitan Police.  24 June 2017.

"robert" AND "lee" AND "jefferson" AND "davis" AND "disavow" AND "confederacy"
"lee" AND "jefferson" AND "confederacy"
"lee" AND "jefferson" AND "civil"

robert-lee-jefferson-davis-disavow-confederacy

robert-lee-jefferson-davis-disavow-confederacy

Both Robert E. Lee and Jefferson Davis disavowed the Confederacy after the Civil War.

A 2015 Tumblr post arguing that after the Civil War, Confederate Army Gen. Robert E. Lee disassociated himself from his cause received renewed attention amid a national controversy about the preservation of Confederate statues and monuments in August 2017: The original post read: < Robert E. Lee himself refused to wear his confederate uniform after the confederacy’s defeat in the American civil war. At his funeral he was not buried in it and no one in attendance was permitted to wear theirs either. He also declared that his confederate battle flag (what we now call “the confederate flag”) never be raised again and that it was a flag of treason. So there’s your “southern heritage.” > On 5 August 2017, a second Tumblr user, girly-friday, expanded the claim to include Confederate President Jefferson Davis and added citations: < Not Just Robert E Lee, which you can read here. but Also the President of the South, Jefferson Davis felt the same way. Basically, “Get the fuck over it.” We lost, we’re a part of this country, this flag signifies an old identity. Cut that shit out and move on. > However, Judith Giesberg — a history professor at Villanova University and the editor of the Journal of the Civil War Era — questioned the citations made in the post, telling us, “I would not read those documents that way at all.” Giesberg and two other experts we contacted took issue with several of revelation19 and girly-friday’s claims, which we have broken down below: Robert E. Lee refused to wear his Confederate uniform after the war and was not buried in it: TRUE One of the citations girly-friday linked to was the statement Lee reportedly made when declining an invitation from the Gettysburg Identification Meeting committee, which was quoted in The South Atlantic Quarterly, Volume 10, published in 1911: < I think it wisest not to open the sores of war but to follow the example of those nations who endeavored to obliterate the marks of civil strife and to commit to oblivion the feelings it engendered. > Barton A. Myers, an associate professor of history at Washington & Lee College — the university where Lee served as president from 1865 until his death in 1870 — agreed that Lee “definitely discouraged” the commemoration of Civil War battle sites such as Gettysburg. “He really did believe that those were public events and public commemorations that might cause additional animosity between the North and the South,” Myers said, adding that Lee was also facing federal treason charges after being indicted by a grand jury. He was never formally tried by a jury, but U.S. Gen. Ulysses S. Grant at one point threatened to resign his commission if Lee was ever arrested. Not only did Lee not wear his uniform in public, Myers said, but the post is correct in stating that he was not buried in it. His U.S. citizenship was not restored until 22 July 1975 by then-President Gerald Ford. Mourners at Lee’s funeral were barred from wearing their own Confederate uniforms: UNPROVEN A photograph credited to the American Civil War Museum reportedly shows mourners attending Lee’s funeral on 15 October 1870 in their Confederate uniforms. But Historian and author Kevin Levin told us in a phone interview that he “would be shocked” if that were the case: < One thing to keep in mind is that during Reconstruction in Virginia, ex-Confederates were prevented from wearing their uniforms. They weren’t allowed to do so. Even wearing buttons from their uniforms was deemed illegal. > Giesberg said: < There is this effort on the part of occupying federal troops to outlaw these sort of flagrant displays of continued loyalty to the Confederacy. We also know that in some cases, men are being arrested for wearing their uniforms, that they’re doing tricky things like cutting off the buttons but still wearing them. It’s all sort of a theater of resistance. > We contacted the museum seeking more information about the photograph, but have yet to receive a response. Lee called the Confederate battle flag “a flag of treason”: FALSE Levin refuted this claim from the post, while saying that — despite urging both sides to “move on” in public — Lee hid many of his own feelings following the war: < Privately, he is still upset about emancipation, the end of slavery; he is upset about African-Americans possibly getting the right to vote. Those are thoughts that he shares with a few people. He’s not writing about it, but by the end of his life in 1869 he had been planning to write an autobiography. He had started collecting material for it but he died too soon. That is part of what makes Lee so attractive to people who want to defend the Confederacy. You can turn him into whatever you want to. He doesn’t bare his soul after the war. > Lee’s testimony before the Joint Committeee on Reconstruction on 17 February 1866, also left it unclear whether he disavowed his Confederate service, since he was never asked that directly. Jefferson Davis “felt the same way” as Lee and disavowed his Confederate service: FALSE In arguing that Davis had renounced his ties to the Confederacy, girly-friday cited a quote from his 1881 book The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, Volume 1: < My pride is that that flag shall not set between contending brothers; and that, when it shall no longer be the common flag of the country, it shall be folded up and laid away like a vesture no longer used. > That statement, Giesberg said, gave her “pause”: < The rest of that [book] is about defending that war as a noble war and defending all of those of his generation who participated in it. I would not want to interpret that quote there without putting it in its full context. > Similarly, Levin said that Davis was likely speaking “metaphorically,” since the Confederate battle flag had not gained acceptance as a public symbol at the time he published the book: < The battle flag was for the most part displayed in a very limited way, almost always by Confederate veterans, at veterans’ reunions. Many of these guys in their older years are living in what were called “soldiers’ homes.” So for special events at these places, they would bring out flags. But they were usually the original flags. They were not the imported kind from China. Don’t think of the context of this as, “There is some big debate regarding the Confederate flag.” That debate happens much later. It’s not until like the 1930s and 40s that it becomes a popular cultural symbol. > Davis’s book gave a revisionist history of the Confederate states’ rational for seceding from the Union, said Levin: < One thing ex-Confederates understand after the war is, they may have lost the war but who writes the history and who tells the stories? There’s a potential victory in that. They don’t want the Northerners to write the history and paint them as the villains. What historians call the “Lost Cause” is all about saving face. It’s all about announcing to the world that “We lost militarily but we remain justified. We are still God’s chosen people.” > Levin added that Davis had rebranded himself as a “symbol of what was lost.” Besides repositioning its cause as a “states’ rights” issue Davis mounted a popular tour of the South after the war alongside his daughter Varina Anne Davis, who became known as the “daughter of the Confederacy” — a much more visible position than Lee. Levin said: < Davis and Lee, they did not see eye-to-eye on how to move forward. Davis did not want to give up the cause, even though he’s revising the cause for which they fought — it’s no longer about slavery, it’s about “states’ rights” — he wants this memory of the Confederacy to live on. He’s a bit more defiant than Lee ever could have been. > Giesberg noted that Davis’ book was “one of the earliest so-called ‘official histories of the Confederacy'” to attempt to redefine Southern grievances, and pointed to a similar shift in rhetoric from his vice-president Alexander Stephens, who went from calling slavery a “cornerstone” in 1861 to saying seven years later that the Confederate states had fought against “the Demon of Centralism, Absolutism, and Despotism.” Myers also drew a link between Lee’s public reputation and Davis’ ability to recast himself after the war: < Part of the reason that Davis could participate in the cult of the “Lost Cause” myth was that he was still alive. Much of the intellectual architecture of the myth is created in the years following Lee’s death in October of 1870. Many speeches from former generals like Jubal Early and William Nelson Pendleton contributed to the foundation of that myth, and those come in the wake of his death. People move from admiring Robert E. Lee in the South to seeing him as a virtually infallible figure during the decades after his demise. >

The South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 10. Bassett, John Spencer et al (editor).;Davis, Jefferson. The Rise and Fall of the Confederate Government, Volume 1. D. Appleton & Co. 1881;Horton, Oliver James. “Confronting Slavery and Revealing the ‘Lost Cause.'” National Park Service.;Dew, Charles. Apostles of Disunion: Southern Secession Commissioners and the Causes of the Civil War. 2001.;Dotinga, Randy. “The famous 1861 ‘Cornerstone Speech’ That Aimed For Hard Truths About The Confederate Battle Flag.” Christian Science Monitor. 8 July 2015.;“Report of the Joint Committee on Reconstruction, at the First Session Thirty-Ninth Congress.” 1866.;Bruce, Philip Alexander. “The National Spirit of General Lee.” The South Atlantic Quarterly, Vol. 10. January 1911.;Hunter, Marjorie. “Citizenship is Voted For Robert E. Lee.” New York Times. 23 July 1975.

ariana-grande-pay-manchester-bombing-funerals

ariana-grande-pay-manchester-bombing-funerals

Ariana Grande contacted the families of those who died in the Manchester Arena attack, and will pay for their funerals.

On 24 May 2017, the @ArianaDailyWW Twitter account (also known as Ariana Updates!) posted the claim that the singer had contacted the families of those who died in a bomb attack at her 22 May concert in Manchester, England, and offered to pay for the victims’ funerals. As of 23 May 2017, authorities had confirmed 22 fatalities in the suicide bomb attack at the Manchester Arena. < News on Ariana: Ariana has reached out to the families who’s [sic] loves ones died last night….she is gonna pay for the funerals! >  < News on Ariana: Ariana has reached out to the families who’s loves ones died last night….she is gonna pay for the funerals! pic.twitter.com/lmGHt4GbEg — Ariana Updates! (@ArianaDailyWW) May 23, 2017 > Later that day, the tweet formed the basis of several articles in the British press, including in the Daily Mail, Daily Mirror, the Independent, Daily Express, and the Daily Record in Scotland. The Sun newspaper also published an article saying “Ariana Grande fans claim ‘broken’ star is going to ‘pay for the funerals’ of those who lost their lives in Manchester terror attack.” However, this article was later removed from the Sun’s web site. Later in the day, the celebrity gossip website PerezHilton.com also published an article based on the tweet, adding: < What an incredible gesture. Although Ari’s team has yet to confirm the report, we bet the 23-year-old actually made this offer. > The tweet also formed the basis of reports by Business Insider and the music and entertainment website Vibe. We contacted Ariana Grande’s spokesperson, but did not receive a response to our queries. So the claim could not be definitively confirmed. However, it’s worth noting that the source of the claim was a fan page that is not affiliated with the artist or her management in any way. The claim was not made via the Twitter account of Ariana Grande herself, her official news account, or her management team. Furthermore, @ArianaDailyWW has a record of posting claims and rumors, some of which later turn out not to be true. Just a few hours before “announcing” the singer’s offer to pay for the victims’ funerals, the account tweeted this “rumor”:  < RUMOR: Ariana is in the Hospital for Mental Health Issues (We are not trying to spread any false news…this is a rumor..)#DWTManchaster pic.twitter.com/2CSyq6nDCH — Ariana Updates! (@ArianaDailyWW) May 23, 2017 > A few hours before that, Ariana Updates! tweeted that it had deleted a previous claim after finding out it was unconfirmed. We don’t know what that claim was.  < We deleted our last tweet about Ariana because we just found out that it’s not confirmed so please forgive us! — Ariana Updates! (@ArianaDailyWW) May 23, 2017 > And on 22 May, the account tweeted that a “second bomb” had been found at the Manchester Arena. This too was false, although police did conduct a precautionary controlled explosion on what turned out to be abandoned clothing:  < BREAKING NEWS: second bomb has been found around the arena… pic.twitter.com/1glaKwC4YL — Ariana Updates! (@ArianaDailyWW) May 23, 2017 > Although it’s not implausible that a celebrity would do such a thing, the claim that Ariana Grande offered to pay for the bombing victims’ funerals is based on a tweet that did not cite any sources and was posted from an unofficial Twitter fan account with a record of posting unconfirmed and false rumors surrounding the Manchester Arena attack. We could not find any news reports that cited a second source for the claim. It should therefore be viewed with extreme skepticism. Â

"delaware" AND "cemetery" AND "begins" AND "exhuming" AND "bodies" AND "confederate" AND "soldiers"

delaware-cemetery-begins-exhuming-bodies-confederate-soldiers

delaware-cemetery-begins-exhuming-bodies-confederate-soldiers

A cemetery in Delaware, Ohio, is exhuming the bodies of confederate soldiers and relocating them to a nearby dump.

On 19 August 2017, the “entertainment” web site Delaware Ohio News published a story claiming that the bodies of Confederate soldiers would be exhumed from a local cemetery and relocated to a nearby dump: < Delaware City Council passed a resolution this week ordering the bodies of all confederate soldiers buried at Oak Grove Cemetery to be exhumed and relocated. The remains will be dumped in nearby Alum Creek Lake. > Although Delaware Ohio News carries a disclaimer identifying itself as a “satire” publication, this article was published amidst heightened nationwide tension around the removal of Confederate monuments and the text itself offered gave almost no clear indication that it was meant to be humorous. Unsurprisingly, some readers mistook it for a genuine news item. The site’s disclaimer reads: < Delaware Ohio News is an online news and content source dedicated to Delaware, Ohio. Founded in the year 1808, we strive to be Delaware’s premier news source, second only to the illustrious Delaware Gazette. Although we were the first Delaware, Ohio newspaper, they remain the lords of Delaware news media. That’s why we’re suicidal and on so many drugs. With all of that said, everything on this website is made up. Do not rely on anything said here. > Although several Confederate statues were removed in August 2017, no Delaware, Ohio, cemetery has announced plans to remove the bodies of confederate soldiers.Â

Suerth, Jessica.  “Here Are the Confederate Memorials That Will Be Removed after Charlottesville.”   CNN.  22 August 2017.

enormous-pyramids-just-discovered-in-antarctica

enormous-pyramids-just-discovered-in-antarctica

Recently discovered satellite photos from Google Earth show that an ancient civilization built pyramids in Antarctica 100 million years ago.

Since at least 2016, a collection of pyramid-shaped mountains in the Ellsworth Range of Antarctica have been used by a variety of click-peddling websites to argue that there may have been an intelligent human civilization on the continent of Antarctica a hundred million years ago. A hundred million years ago, for the record, is roughly a hundred million years before modern homo sapiens sapiens actually evolved, give or take a couple 100,000 years. As many headlines pushing this story want you to understand, this would “change how we look at history forever.” The most recent version of this story comes from a post filed to the “consciousness” section of new-age web site “Earth. We Are One” (EWAO), which suggests that a photograph from a mountain range first discovered in 1935 is now breaking news: < Recently, Google Earth satellite imagery discovered a constellation of three snow-covered pyramids in Antarctica. Scientists and researchers are, admittedly, rather taken aback. Two of the three pyramids are about 10 miles inland, while the third is directly near the coastline. The implications? Well, this discovery could end up re-writing our entire history. No research has ever mentioned a civilization in Antarctica, much less one with the technological know-how to construct pyramids. So, how did these pyramids get there? > Without actually answering that question, EWAO then lists a litany of undeniably cool, but wholly irrelevant facts about the geologic history of Antarctica, even including some that are not completely incorrect: < Over millions of years, Antarctica has drifted from a position closer to the equator to its present perma-frozen location. > What EWAO describes here is plate tectonics — the foundational theory of modern geology that has been well accepted since the 1960s and was first presented as “continental drift” in the early 1900s. In fact, one of the first suggestions that Antarctica may have been warmer in the past came from the discovery of 250-million-year-old fossils of plants in Antarctica by British explorer Robert Falcon Scott during a 1912 expedition, which later provided support for the concept. EWAO then unnecessarily cites a scientist at the British Antarctic Survey who (factually) stated that there was lush vegetation on the continent 100 million years ago. EWAO presumably does this so they can write the words “The British Antarctic Survey backs this up”, also presumably hoping that the reader wouldn’t catch on that the Survey was talking about long-established science rather than the complete redefinition of evolutionary history and wholesale rejection of the geologic and archeological records. The final bit of supporting evidence for an ancient civilization capable of making 4,000-foot-tall structures (which, it should be noted, would be a remarkable feat given the fact that this would be ten times the height of the Great Pyramids of Giza) is information provided by a series of expeditions to Antarctica’s Lake Vida, which, in EWAO’s words, “discovered unexpected microbial lifeforms trapped under a 65-foot-thick sheet of ice [that] resemble descendants of microorganisms from much warmer climates”. The discovery of these organisms was notable, given the extreme environment and their ability to reproduce once thawed, but not because of some purported resemblance to more temperate species of bacteria. One could make the equally factual argument that penguins share resemblance with animals from a warmer climate, because as birds they evolved from theropod dinosaurs that inhabited an ice-free Earth. Such an observation would be equally useless. Despite the irrelevance of the allegedly supporting information provided, EWAO concludes: < About 100 million years ago, someone was building pyramids on the Antarctica that was then located at the equator. > Ignoring the fact that Antarctica has been in its present latitude for the past 100 million years (its most recent warm periods were caused by climatic factors, not tectonics), the question EWAO should have been answering is this: Why would a mountain look like a pyramid? The answer to that question is that pyramidal peaked mountains, also called a horn (as in Matterhorn), are a feature of glaciated areas; they form from the convergence of glaciers that scour the sides of an existing landmass. This is a great explanation for the pyramid shaped mountains highlighted by EWAO, as they exist at the convergence of multiple ice sheets on a continent noted for its nearly 100 percent glaciated surface. Therefore, we rank this claim as false because, as University of California, Irvine geology professor Eric Rignot told LiveScience in 2016: “This is just a mountain that looks like a pyramid.”

Smithsonian Museum of Natural History.  “Homo sapiens”   Accessed 24 August 2017.;Earth. We Are One.  “Enormous Pyramid Just Discovered in Antarctica Could Change How We Look At History Forever.”   18 August 2017.;Dalziel, I. W. D.  “The Ellsworth Mountains: Critical and Enduringly Enigmatic.”   U.S. Geological Survey and The National Academies.  2007.;WIlson, J. Tuzo.  “Hypothesis of Earth’s Behaviour.”   Nature.  8 June 1963.;University of California Museum of Paleontology.  “Alfred Wegener (1880-1930).”   Accessed 24 August 2017.;Cantrill, David J., and Poole, Imogen.  The Vegetation of Antarctica Through Geological Time.   Cambridge University Press, 2012.  0521855985.;Frances, J. E., et al.  “100 Million Years of Antarctic Climate Evolution: Evidence from Fossil Plants”.   Proceedings of the 10th International Symposium on Antarctic Earth Sciences, The National Academies Press.  2008.;Geggel, Laura.  “New Pyramid in Antarctica? Not Quite, Say Geologists.”   Live Science.  29 November 2016.;Smithsonian Encyclopedia.  “The Egyptian Pyramid.”   Accessed 24 August 2017.;Murray, Alison E., et al.  “Microbial Life at −13 °C in the Brine of an Ice-Sealed Antarctic Lake.”   Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences.  December 2012.;National Science Foundation.  “Researchers Uncover Extreme Lake — and 3000-Year-Old Microbes — in Mars-Like Antarctic Environment.”   16 December 2002.;Understanding Evolution, UC Berkeley.  “The Origin of Birds.”   Accessed 24 August 2017.;Sugden, David, E.  “The Million-year Evolution of the Glacial Trimline in the Southernmost Ellsworth Mountains, Antarctica.”   Earth and Planetary Science Letters.  1 July 2017.

james-earl-jones-star-wars-london-segregation

james-earl-jones-star-wars-london-segregation

A photograph shows actor James Earl Jones dressed as Darth Vader alongside 'Star Wars' stars Mark Hamill, Anthony Daniels, and Kenny Baker.

A photograph purportedly showing actor James Earl Jones dressed as Darth Vader on the streets of London alongside other Star Wars actors (sans costumes), is frequently shared with the strange claim that Jones had to socialize incognito due to London’s “strict segregation laws”: This claim appears to have been made up out of the whole cloth. For starters, there were no “strict segregation laws” in London in 1979 — there were no segregation laws in England at all. The 1965 Race Relations Act prohibited “discrimination on racial grounds in places of public resort.” Getting back to the photograph in question, however, the man in the Darth Vader suit is not James Earl Jones. Although Jones is well-known as the voice of Darth Vader, he didn’t actually physically portray the dark lord on the big screen. As such, it would have been unusual for Jones to wear the costume for a promotional event. Mark Hamill, the actor who played Luke Skywalker, and who appears in the photograph, tweeted: < WRONG! Never heard of so-called”ban”-but that’s NOT Mr. Jones in Vader costume-He NEVER did press for #SW & certainly never in #DarthDrag! https://t.co/zcY8ZDgE0h — Mark Hamill (@HamillHimself) August 29, 2017 > So what about Dave Prowse, the actor who actually portrayed Vader on the big screen? According to the actor’s Twitter account, it’s not him either: < @HamillHimself is right. Total rubbish. No clue who is inside that cheap looking halloween costume. Also not big enough for Vader ? #Fake https://t.co/XHkhzlCpt8 — DARTH VADER (@isDARTHVADER) August 29, 2017 >  The photograph was most likely taken by The Lancashire Evening Post during the opening weekend of Star Wars in the United Kingdom in January 1978. Although we haven’t been able to locate this exact image in the newspaper’s archive, we did find a photograph featuring Kenny Baker, the actor who played R2D2, with a similar Darth Vader character. The caption for that photograph didn’t even mention the Vader character, indicating that it likely wasn’t a cast member behind the mask: < Preston’s own Kenny Baker runs into trouble during the UK premiere of the first Star Wars film on January 27 1978. > Â

putting-coin-top-cup-ice-accurately-tell-freezer-lost-power

putting-coin-top-cup-ice-accurately-tell-freezer-lost-power

Placing a coin on top of a frozen glass of water in your freezer can help you tell if your freezer experienced a significant loss of power in your absence.

MOSTLY FALSE

In the wake of numerous evacuation-necessitating hurricanes and wildfires in the waning months of 2017, a “lifehack” purporting to provide a way to make sure a freezer never lost power while the home was unattended picked up steam. The claim, at least as it is found online, appears to have its origins in a 5 October 2016 Facebook post (later picked up by outlets like Hello Giggles and Lifehacker) which stated: < I just heard a great tip. It’s called the one cup tip. You put a cup of water in your freezer. Freeze it solid and then put a quarter on top of it and leave it in your freezer. That way when you come back after you’ve been evacuated you can tell if your food went completely bad and just refroze or if it stayed frozen while you were gone. If the quarter has fallen to the bottom of the cup that means all the food defrosted and you should throw it out. But if the quarter is either on the top or in the middle of the cup then your food may still be ok. It would also be a great idea to leave this in your freezer all the time and if you lose power for any reason you will have this tip to fall back on. If you don’t feel good about your food, just throw it out. The main thing is for all to be safe. Please SHARE this on your page. > It is certainly true that if the ice melts completely, the coin — easily more dense than water — would fall to the base before being refrozen. The problem, however, is that this scenario relies on two crucial assumptions that may not be valid: Assumption: The coin will change position even if the melt is partial. Because ice is less dense than water, the ice on which the coin is resting on will float on the water it creates as it is melting. It is therefore possible that the cup of ice could melt partially — even substantially — before refreezing and still show the coin as being in the same position. To be sure, it could also fall off or move in a clearly detectable way, but it is not guaranteed. Assumption: If the ice doesn’t melt completely, your food will be fine. The amount of time it would take for ice to melt in an insulated but unpowered freezer depends on a number of variables: the size of the freezer, the size of the block of ice, how much other food is in the freezer, the temperature inside the house, and the temperature the freezer was set at before losing power, to name a few. If, as discussed above, the only way to be truly confident that the coin test represents a significant loss of freezer power is for all the ice to melt completely, then one has to be confident as well that the amount of time it takes to partially melt said ice wouldn’t cause harm to your food. This, however, is not necessarily a safe assumption to make either. According to the FDA, an unpowered, unopened freezer will keep food safe for between 24 and 48 hours. Is it possible for a block of ice to remain partially solid for more than 24 hours? In all probability, yes. Coleman alleges that their 52 quart “Xtreme Cooler” (essentially an insulated freezer without power), can keep ice for up to five days. This means it is possible for food to have gone bad before the coin has a chance to move to a detectably new location. Because these two assumptions are not necessarily safe ones, we rank the efficacy and universality of this “one cup tip” hack as mostly false.

USGS Water School.  “Water Density”   Accessed 19 October 2017.;Food and Drug Administration.  “Food and Water Safety During Power Outages and Floods”   Accessed 19 October 2017.;Amazon.com.  “Coleman 52 qt. Xtreme Cooler”   Accessed 19 October 2017.

cheating-husband-castration

cheating-husband-castration

A 43-year-old woman forced her unfaithful husband to eat his own genitals.

In late April 2017, three regional fake news items claimed that a local woman forced her husband to eat his own genitals after learning of his cheating behavior. The items were published by the Florida Sun Post, the Alabama Observer, and the Mississippi Herald respectively. All contained near verbatim content, with the location varying between each iteration: < A 43-year old woman from Alabama’s St. Clair County is in custody after authorities were called to a property on 16th St S in Pell City late last night to respond to a reported domestic disturbance. Upon arrival, the officers found a confronting scene. In the master bedroom, a 49-year old man, and the husband of the accused woman, lay in a pool of blood with a gruesome wound to his groin. “The male victim did not show any signs of consciousness and paramedics were called immediately,” a source familiar with the matter told the media. After the paramedics arrived, the man was found to have had his penis and testicles ‘cleanly severed’ with a sharp instrument, believed to be a knife that was found on the bedside table. The wound was dressed and the victim was rushed to a nearby hospital, where he is now listed in a serious but stable condition. “We pled with her to reveal where she had hidden the man’s genitals, but she refused to discuss it at first,” said the source. However, after continued interrogation, the woman finally admitted the grim truth. “She told us that after cutting them off, she was struck by such a sense of anger that she forced them into her husband’s mouth. She admitted to holding the knife to his throat and demanding that he chew and swallow them, or she would kill him.” … A nurse gave the victim syrup of ipecac to induce vomiting, and the partially-digested genitals were regurgitated,” said the source. > All three publications are known purveyors of fake news. One particularly successful Mississippi Herald hoax, which was picked up by major media outlets in the U.S. and the U.K., alleged that a couple discovered they were biological siblings during IVF treatment. And a Florida Sun Post article duped news outlets with a false claim about the death of a New Zealand woman during an “alligator selfie.”

dem-party-logo-white-supremacy

dem-party-logo-white-supremacy

The official logo of the Alabama Democratic Party, adopted in 1904 and not replaced until 1966, featured an illustration of a crowing rooster and the slogan "White Supremacy, For the RIght."

Amid political controversy engendered by the protests of National Football League athletes who refused to stand during pre-game renditions of the national anthem in late September 2017 to display solidarity with black victims of police violence — a gesture supported by many Democrats but condemned by President Trump and conservative Republicans — a meme was circulated via social media making the point that the Democratic Party was not always a standard bearer for racial equality. This is an example from Twitter: < Dem Party Logo until 1966. All traces of this logo was purged from the internet. Archive –> https://t.co/OavP0ZnHNn h/t @stranahan pic.twitter.com/vjibsCxj3m — Red Nation Rising (@RedNationRising) September 24, 2017 > The centerpiece of the post is a reproduction of an illustration captioned “Dem Party Logo until 1966,” featuring a drawing of a crowing rooster and the slogan “White Supremacy, For the Right.” And although the description is somewhat misleading (“White Supremacy” was never a slogan of the national Democratic Party, for example, nor have we seen evidence that the image was “purged from the Internet”), this was, in fact, the emblem of the Alabama Democratic Party between 1904 and 1966. First, regarding the rooster, it’s often mistakenly assumed that the donkey was always the symbol of the Democratic Party, when in fact the party began using a crowing rooster as its mascot around 1840. This version of how that came to pass is from a biographical sketch of Indianapolis lawyer and Whig politician Thomas D. Walpole published in 1876: < In 1840 [Tom Walpole] was an ardent and enthusiastic Whig, and rendered great service to the Whig party, and contributed largely to the success of General Harrison. It was during this canvass that Tom gave to the Democratic party their emblem, which they have claimed ever since, the chicken cock, or rooster. George Patterson, then editing the Democratic paper, wrote, just before the August election of that year, to Joseph Chapman, of Greenfield, that the Democratic party would be beat, and that there was no hope, but, said he, “Crow, Chapman, crow.” By some means Tom got possession of the letter, and exposed it. A year or two subsequent to this circumstance Messrs. George and Page Chapman became proprietors and editors of the Democratic paper and placed a rooster at the head of their paper, and from this circumstance it was generally supposed that they were the persons to whom the letter was addressed and the original crowers; but such is not the case. It is to Tom Walpole the Democratic party is indebted for the emblem of the rooster. > Other sources grant full credit to Joseph Chapman for dreaming up the rooster symbol, but in any case, although it was never officially adopted as the emblem of the national Democratic Party, it very quickly became an unofficial one and remained so until cartoonist Thomas Nast’s depictions of Republicans as elephants and Democrats as donkeys captured the public imagination in the late nineteenth century (to date, the national Democratic Party has never officially adopted any animal as its symbol). The forerunner of today’s Democratic Party was born during the 1820s and ’30s, coalescing around the populist presidential candidacy of national war hero and southern slaveholder Andrew Jackson. Although egalitarianism and freedom of the individual were much-touted ideals of “Jacksonian Democracy,” in reality the Democratic Party of the time took white supremacy for granted and had little to no interest in defending the freedom and equality of African Americans, native Americans, or any other racial minorities. Still, the party was conflicted over the expansion of slavery and split in two during the 1860 elections, with the Northern Democrats opposing expansion and Southern Democrats favoring it. The Democratic Party remained dominant in the South after the Civil War, opposing Reconstruction and enacting laws to suppress black voters and enforce racial segregation. The Alabama Democratic Party went further than most, calling for the adoption of a new state constitution in 1901 that explicitly disenfranchised black voters, and celebrating its success in that effort by officially embracing the slogan “White Supremacy” three years later. The Monroe Journal of Claiborne, Alabama reported on 2 June 1904: < The state executive committee adopted the game cock as the Democratic Party emblem. Above the bird will be the words “White Supremacy” and below “For the Right.” > To be sure, there were a few Alabama Democrats who objected to the emblem after its adoption, though not for the reasons you might suppose. For example, Democratic Congressman J. Thomas Heflin was perfectly fine with the racist slogan, but felt the image of the rooster was undignified: < I think that the emblem is not what it should be, and that it fails to impress the people with the dignity of the Democratic Party. To my mind it would have been much better to have had, instead of the rooster, the picture of a handsome young woman, holding the Constitution in a scroll aloft, with the words “Here We Rest” prominently shown upon it. I see no objection to the use of the two expressions already adopted, but do not think that the design is worth of a great party like ours. > Dignified or not, that emblem would appear at the top of every Alabama state ballot for many decades to come, as noted, for example, in this November 1940 report by the Chicago Tribune: < In Alabama the disfranchisement of the Negro is proclaimed proudly by the Democratic party on the official ballot in all elections. At the head of the Democratic column on the ballot appears the emblem of the rooster. Arched over the rooster’s head are the words: “White Supremacy.” Below the rooster appear the words: “For the Right.” > By the early 1950s, however, the Alabama Democratic Party’s proud embrace of white supremacy was becoming a liability for the national party. In 1952, New York Gov. Thomas Dewey, a Republican campaigning on behalf of Dwight D. Eisenhower, gave a speech laying the racist logo at the doorstep of Eisenhower’s Democratic rival Adlai Stevenson (from the Dixon Evening Telegraph, 9 October 1952): < Gov. Thomas E. Dewer says the “White Supremacy” slogan on Alabama’s Democratic ballot convicts that party’s top nominees of “rankest hypocrisy.” In a state-wide radio and television address Wednesday night, the New York governor ripped into Gov. Adlai E. Stevenson and Sen. John J. Sparkman of Alabama after holding up to TV viewers the official Alabama ballot showing: A rooster emblem, with the words “White Supremacy” above it and the words “For the Right” below it. “There it is,” Dewey said, “the rooster and the banner of White supremacy — Ku Klux Klan — Jim Crow banner — flying over the election for Stevenson and Sparkman in this ear 1952.” > Though the Democrats lost that election, the emblem would remain intact on the ballot for another 14 years, until leaders of the Alabama Democratic Party finally modified the slogan in 1966 for purely pragmatic reasons: the party needed “Negro” voters. The Montgomery Advertiser reported: < In an unexpected display of strength, the Loyalist faction of the State Democratic Executive Committee removed the “white supremacy” label from the party emblem Saturday in a move admittedly designed to keep Negro voters in the fold. … The only change made in the emblem was removing the words “white supremacy” and substituting “Democrats.” The rooster was untouched. Charles W. McKay of Talladega offered the resolution changing the emblem. McKay gained fame a number of years ago when he authored the “Nullification Resolution” in the Legislature which sought to declare null and void the Supreme Court’s school desegregation decision. McKay made it clear that the emblem change was necessary if the Democrats were to attract Negro votes this year. “We can’t afford to spend a lot of money nominating candidates this spring and then take a stick and run off 150,000 to 175,000 voters who might vote Democratic,” he declared. > Ironically (though the irony may well have been lost on McKay), it was only because the voter suppression measures instituted decades earlier by his own state party had been knocked down by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that many of those potential new black voters would even have access to the polls. As to the Alabama Democratic Party rooster, it, too, was finally sent into forced retirement, but not till 1996 (30 years later), when it was replaced by the image of a donkey.

Bridges, Edwin C.   Alabama: The Making of an American State.    Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2016.   ISBN 9780817358761, p. 159.;Cotter, Patrick R.   “Democratic Party in Alabama.”    Encyclopedia of Alabama.   3 May 2017.;Frederick, Jeff.   Stand Up for Alabama: Governor George Wallace.    Tuscaloosa: University of Alabama Press, 2007.   ISBN 9780817315740, p. 29.;Henning, Arthur Sears Henning.   “Alabama Ballot Boasts of White Supremacy.”    Chicago Tribune.   29 November 1940.;Ingram, Bob.   “Loyalist Faction Wins; ‘White Supremacy’ Goes.”    The Montgomery Advertiser.   23 January 1966.;Nowland, John H.B.   Sketches of Prominent Citizens of 1876.    Indianapolis: Tilford & Carlon, 1877, p. 106.;Seidman, Steven.   “The Rooster as the Symbol of the U.S. Democratic Party.”    Ithaca College.   12 June 2010.;Warren, Sarah A.   “Constitutional Convention of 1901.”    Encyclopedia of Alabama.   15 October 2014.;Associated Press.   “Democrats Make Donkey Symbol.”    The Montgomery Advertiser.   27 April 1996.;Dixon Evening Telegraph.   “Demos Run Under ‘White Supremacy Tag in South.”    9 October 1952.;The Gaffney Ledger.   “Action State Democratic Executive Committee of Alabama.”    25 May 1904.

lincoln-and-lees-views-on-slavery

lincoln-and-lees-views-on-slavery

David Mikkelson

A meme accurately reflects Abraham Lincoln's and Robert E. Lee's views on slavery.

The outbreak of violence at a white nationalist rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, in August 2017 led to renewed debate in the United States about the appropriateness and meaning of public monuments to Confederate figures. Was removing statues, memorials, and other commemorations of those who fought on the Southern side in the Civil War a form of “political correctness” tantamount to “changing history”, or was it a justified end to displaying “explicit symbols of white supremacy” in America’s public spaces? That debate included, typically, the circulation via social media of memes attempting to foster skewed historical perspectives on the Civil War and slavery, including this one which juxtaposed purported quotes from President Abraham Lincoln and Confederate General Robert E. Lee on those subjects: The quote attributed to Lincoln in that meme was but an incomplete reproduction of a single sentence that was plucked from a longer piece of correspondence and offered without a shred of context, a misleading technique used to create the false impression that Lincoln said the exact opposite of what he actually meant. The line “If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it …” comes from an open letter Lincoln wrote in August 1862 to New-York Tribune editor Horace Greeley, who had recently published an editorial criticizing Lincoln for being “strangely and disastrously remiss” in efforts to emancipate slaves. In his response, Lincoln made it clear that his single, paramount goal in waging war was to restore the Union as quickly as possible and “not [to] either to save or to destroy slavery,” and that he disagreed with those who asserted that his goal should necessarily encompass either the abolition or the preservation of slavery: < I have just read yours of the 19th. addressed to myself through the New-York Tribune … As to the policy I “seem to be pursuing” as you say, I have not meant to leave any one in doubt. I would save the Union. I would save it the shortest way under the Constitution. The sooner the national authority can be restored; the nearer the Union will be “the Union as it was.” If there be those who would not save the Union, unless they could at the same time save slavery, I do not agree with them. If there be those who would not save the Union unless they could at the same time destroy slavery, I do not agree with them. My paramount object in this struggle is to save the Union, and is not either to save or to destroy slavery. If I could save the Union without freeing any slave I would do it, and if I could save it by freeing all the slaves I would do it; and if I could save it by freeing some and leaving others alone I would also do that. What I do about slavery, and the colored race, I do because I believe it helps to save the Union; and what I forbear, I forbear because I do not believe it would help to save the Union. I shall do less whenever I shall believe what I am doing hurts the cause, and I shall do more whenever I shall believe doing more will help the cause. I shall try to correct errors when shown to be errors; and I shall adopt new views so fast as they shall appear to be true views. I have here stated my purpose according to my view of official duty; and I intend no modification of my oft-expressed personal wish that all men every where could be free. > It’s also important to note that in his closing, Lincoln drew a clear distinction between what he felt his political duty required of him (i.e., preservation of the Union and not a forced, unilateral abolition of slavery) and what his personal viewpoint on the slavery issue was (i.e., a “wish that all men every where could be free”). As for the quote attributed to General Lee, about his supposed wish (expressed on eve of the Civil War) that he wished he “owned every slave in the South” so that he could head off the conflict by “free[ing] them all,” there is no record of Lee’s having expressed any such sentiment. The closest one can come to finding any documentation of Lee’s having said anything similar is a reminiscence published by Presbyterian pastor John Leyburn in Century Magazine in 1885, some fourteen years after Lee’s death. In that reminiscence, the Rev. Dr. Leyburn (who, like Lee, was a Virginian but relocated to Baltimore after the conclusion of the Civil War) stated that he had engaged Lee in conversation in 1869 while the latter was in Baltimore in connection with a railroad project. According to Leyburn, during that conversation the former Confederate general averred that he had not waged war over the issue of slavery, that he “was rejoiced” that slavery had been abolished, and that he would “cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war” in order to see the end of slavery: < “So far,” said General Lee, “from engaging in a war to perpetuate slavery, I am rejoiced that slavery is abolished. I believe it will be greatly for the interests of the South. So fully am I satisified of this, as regards Virginia especially, that I would cheerfully have lost all I have lost by the war, and suffered all I have suffered, to have this objective obtained.” This he said with much earnestness. > Even this passage, which does not match the quote attributed to Lee above, is problematic in several ways: primarily that the purported conversation was witnessed by no one other than the person who reported it, that it was not disclosed until some sixteen years after the fact, and that Lee was long dead by the time it emerged and thus could not confirm or deny it. Moreover, even if it were correctly reported, we can’t determine at this remove whether it truly reflected Lee’s beliefs at the time, or whether it was part a post-war effort by Lee to resurrect his reputation in the North. Much could be written about Lee’s attitude towards slavery, but perhaps the best single example of it (and one of the few expressed in his own words) is a letter he penned to his wife in 1856, in which he described slavery as “a moral and political evil” and anticipated its eventual abolition, but in which he also maintained that slavery was a greater evil to white people than to black people, and that black people were better off living enslaved in America than living free in Africa: < There are few, I believe, in this enlightened age, who will not acknowledge that slavery as an institution is a moral and political evil. It is idle to expatiate on its disadvantages. I think it is a greater evil to the white than to the colored race. While my feelings are strongly enlisted in behalf of the latter, my sympathies are more deeply engaged for the former. The blacks are immeasurably better off here than in Africa, morally, physically, and socially. The painful discipline they are undergoing is necessary for their further instruction as a race, and will prepare them, I hope, for better things. How long their servitude may be necessary is known and ordered by a merciful Providence. Their emancipation will sooner result from the mild and melting influences of Christianity than from the storm and tempest of fiery controversy. This influence, though slow, is sure. The doctrines and miracles of our Saviour have required nearly two thousand years to convert but a small portion of the human race, and even among Christian nations what gross errors still exist! While we see the course of the final abolition of human slavery is still onward, and give it the aid of our prayers, let us leave the progress as well as the results in the hands of Him who, chooses to work by slow influences, and with whom a thousand years are but as a single day.” > Or, as Civil War historian Eric Foner described Lee’s mixed viewpoint on slavery more succinctly in the New York Times: < “He was not a pro-slavery ideologue,” Eric Foner, a Civil War historian, author and professor of history at Columbia University, said of Lee. “But I think equally important is that, unlike some white southerners, he never spoke out against slavery.” “[W]hat interests people who debate Lee today is his connection with slavery and his views about race. During his lifetime, Lee owned a small number of slaves. He considered himself a paternalistic master but could also impose severe punishments, especially on those who attempted to run away. Lee said almost nothing in public about the institution.” “Lee’s code of gentlemanly conduct did not seem to apply to blacks. During the Gettysburg campaign, he did nothing to stop soldiers in his army from kidnapping free black farmers for sale into slavery. In Reconstruction, Lee made it clear that he opposed political rights for the former slaves. Referring to blacks (30 percent of Virginia’s population), he told a Congressional committee that he hoped the state could be “rid of them.” Urged to condemn the Ku Klux Klan’s terrorist violence, Lee remained silent.” >

Leyburn, John.  “An Interview with General Robert E. Lee.”   Century Magazine.  May 1885  (pp. 166-167).;Foner, Eric.  “The Making and the Breaking of the Legend of Robert E. Lee.”   The New York Times.  28 August 2017.;Fortin, Jacey.  “What Robert E. Lee Wrote to The Times About Slavery in 1858.”   The New York Times.  18 August 2017.;The New York Times.  “A LETTER FROM PRESIDENT LINCOLN: Reply to Horace Greeley. Slavery and the Union. The Restoration of the Union the Paramount Object.”   24 August 1862.

darrell-issa-avoid-protesters

darrell-issa-avoid-protesters

Bethania Palma

Rep. Darrell Issa "hid" on the roof of his California office to avoid protesters.

On 30 May 2017, blogs began reporting that Rep. Darrell Issa (R-California) “hid” from constituents by standing on the roof of his office in Vista, a city in northern San Diego County. The stories were prompted by a tweet posted by Mike Levin, a Democrat who is challenging Issa in 2018, which showed a picture of Issa on the roof holding his phone along with a caption that indicates he was “too afraid” to speak with constituents. PoliticsUSA.com reported: < Rep. Darrell Issa (R-CA) was so afraid of a group of protesters that he hid on the roof of his district office instead of listening to his constituents. Issa’s opponent Mike Levine tweeted a picture of Issa hiding on his district office roof to avoid angry questions from people about health care: Yes, this is really @DarrellIssa on the roof of his district office building. Too afraid to come speak with assembled constituents below. pic.twitter.com/wCYRjO8Ev8 — Mike Levin (@MikeLevinCA) May 30, 2017 > Issa tweeted that he spoke to protesters who had gathered at 10 a.m. local time outside his district office, though an organizer said it was strange to seen him on the rooftop. Issa tweeted he was simply taking pictures of the crowd after chatting with them: < Spent the morning talking with constituents gathered outside the office today, then popped upstairs to take a quick pic! pic.twitter.com/K2CFdenOIj — Darrell Issa (@DarrellIssa) May 30, 2017 > Mike Levin, an environmental attorney running against Issa in 2018, said he stands by his comment and believes that although Issa didn’t technically hide, he did avoid rally attendees gathered outside his office by retreating from them. Levin told us: < He preferred to be up on the roof taking pictures of his constituents rather than talking to them. So I stand by what I said 1,000 percent. Was he figuratively hiding? Absolutely. > Protest organizer Ellen Montanari said Issa did speak to at least two protest attendees, including herself and one other person, from what she saw. But the congressman didn’t spend the morning jovially chatting with them, as he characterized in his tweet. Issa spokesman Calvin Moore told us via e-mail: < The Congressman came down today to talk with the protestors gathered and answer some of the questions they might have. (They’ve been pretty adamant about town halls, so he thought they’d relish at the opportunity to answer some questions then and there). He spent some time talking to a few of those gathered regardless then headed upstairs to take a pic of everyone. > Montanari told us in a phone interview that things unfolded with a bit more hostility than Moore let on. Since late January 2017, protesters have been gathering outside Issa’s Vista office every Tuesday. Normally he comes out and she offers him a microphone, which he uses for impromptu question-and-answer sessions. On 30 May, however, Montanari told us that Issa was less talkative and more accusatory: < I saw Rep. Issa across the street before our rally started. He’s come down to speak with us a number of times. I went over to shake his hand, and he said, ‘step away, you’re a protester.’ I said ‘no, I’m a constituent.’ He went on to just blast me. Our whole point is that we want to hear form him, and he has in the past been rude and condescending, but nothing like this. He was being incredibly disrespectful to me, and the rally participants. I listened to him for a little while and he turned on his heel and walked away. I walked back and I decided he was not interested in talking with us, he was more interested in talking at us. It’s our rally, the people paid for the microphone, and so I decided that if he was going to be a bully he was not going to get the microphone. > Montanari said he stopped to chat with at least one other participant before going back into his office,  appearing on the rooftop, then coming back out with a piece of cake which he gave to a supporter of President Donald Trump, who also attends as a counter-protester: < There’s one Trump supporter who comes every week — we know him, we’ve gotten to be buddies. [Issa] came out and delivered a piece of cake to him. It was a bit ironic because this guy has some serious health issues. I’m looking at the optics of this thinking, ‘with one hand you’re offering him a piece of cake and with the other you are taking away his health care.’ It was a photo op for him, he had a photographer with him. it’s not like he was being particularly nice to [the Trump supporter]. It should have been anything other than cake, because the historical significance of this was not lost on anyone. > Montanari characterized Issa’s standing on the rooftop and taking pictures of the crowd as “surreal”: < I grew up in D.C. and I’ve never seen anything like that, ever. It was about as random as they come. > The incident took place after protesters were given tighter restrictions by the city for their weekly rallies, including being moved across the street from the office instead of standing on the sidewalk directly out front, and limitations being placed on amplified sound. Montanari characterized the 30 May 2017 rally as having “really escalated.” When we asked Moore why Issa had chosen this particular day to take pictures of protesters from the roof, Moore responded: < Who cares? > According to San Diego Union Tribune reporter Joshua Stewart, Issa called him the day of the roof controversy, labeled him an “operative” for his opponents, and then hung up on him. < I just received an unprompted call from @DarrellIssa who said he tried, unsuccessfully to speak with protesters outside his district office. — Joshua Stewart (@jptstewart) May 30, 2017 > < .@DarrellIssa said the protesters wouldnt’ speak with him, so he went up to the roof and took pictures. — Joshua Stewart (@jptstewart) May 30, 2017 > < .then @DarrellIssa called me an “operative” for his opponents, and ” It’s interesting that the paper has become as small as your words.” — Joshua Stewart (@jptstewart) May 30, 2017 > < Then @DarrellIssa hung up on me. — Joshua Stewart (@jptstewart) May 30, 2017 > While Issa didn’t technically “hide” on the roof (he was in plain view), it seems that he did retreat from protesters who did not want to speak with him.

Figueroa, Teri, and Stewart, Josh. “Issa Appears on Rooftop as Hundreds Protest Outside His Vista Office.”   San Diego Union Tribune. 30 May 2017.;Figueroa, Teri. “As Protests Continue, Restrictions Tighten.”   San Diego Union Tribune. 22 May 2017.;Stewart, Joshua. “Issa’s Reactions Trigger Social Media Storm.”   San Diego Union Tribune. 17 May 2017.;Easley, Jason. “Darrell Issa Hides on a Roof to Because He Is Too Afraid to Face People Angry About Trumpcare.”   PoliticsUSA.com. 30 May 2017.

sealed-indictment-president-trump

sealed-indictment-president-trump

Bethania Palma

A sealed indictment has been granted against President Donald Trump.

On 13 May 2017, Louise Mensch and Claude Taylor (both of whom have appointed themselves citizen investigators on the topic of Russia’s meddling into U.S. political affairs) made the explosive claim that a “sealed indictment” has been issued against President Donald Trump. In a blog post on the web site Patribotics.com, they reported: < Separate sources with links to the intelligence and justice communities have stated that a sealed indictment has been granted against Donald Trump. While it is understood that the Supremacy Clause of the Constitution means that, until Mr. Trump is impeached, he cannot be prosecuted, sources say that the indictment is intended by the FBI and prosecutors in the Justice Department to form the basis of Mr. Trump’s impeachment. The indictment is, perhaps uniquely, not intended or expected to be used for prosecution, sources say, because of the constitutional position of the President. > Initially, Taylor reported on Twitter that the indictment had been issued by a Foreign Intelligence Surveillance Act (FISA) court: < @LouiseMensch and I are reporting that a sealed indictment has been issued against Trump by FISA court to serve as the basis of Impeachment. — Claude Taylor (@TrueFactsStated) May 14, 2017 > This aspect of the claim is demonstrably not true. New York University law professor Christopher Jon Sprigman told us in a phone interview that the FISA court exists for one purpose only, and that is to grant surveillance warrants: < With respect to the FISA court, that court doesn’t issue indictments. It considers requests for surveillance authority by intelligence agencies and it grants what are refered to as FISA warrants. With the respect to the sealed indictment, indictments are typically what grand juries do and the FISA court has no power to convene a grand jury. The FISA court is a special purpose court. > Taylor later backtracked, noting he had erred in claiming a FISA court had issued an indictment, and added more detail, saying the story is based on two sources: < 1. I want to clarify a couple of points. First, I’m not an attorney, when I get terms or details wrong-I’ll own it. I reported indictments — Claude Taylor (@TrueFactsStated) May 14, 2017 > < 2. based on 2 sources. One detail I got wrong was who issues indictments-that’s Grand Jury out of EDVA. I stand by story that sealed — Claude Taylor (@TrueFactsStated) May 14, 2017 > < 3. indictments have been issued. I apologize for any confusion. — Claude Taylor (@TrueFactsStated) May 14, 2017 > When asked about the story, Mensch sent us an e-mailed response that seemed to contradict Taylor: < I have never made any such claim (re FISA court). It would be ironic were Snopes to say so, as that would be untrue. Further as a fact-checking website ought you to email me with false facts, such as “two sources”? The story does not specify the number of sources, beyond using the plural. I have no intention of providing any details which might identify sources. I am perfectly confident in my reporting. The story stands as reported. One reason it is short is because it represents what the sources of the co-authors agreed precisely. > Some attorneys seemed doubtful that an indictment against the president had been issued, in part because in 1973 during the Watergate scandal, the Department of Justice’s Office of Legal Counsel (OLC) determined that a president is immune to criminal prosecution while in office: < OLC analyses of the question: 1) https://t.co/pcXFkSLplK 2) https://t.co/669rYwCquC https://t.co/6fPT8Z3oER — Jack Goldsmith (@jacklgoldsmith) May 15, 2017 > In 2000, Randolph Moss, assistant attorney general for the OLC concluded that opinion was still valid, with the caveat that it hasn’t been adjudicated in court: < In 1973, the Department of Justice concluded that the indictment and criminal prosecution of a sitting President would unduly interfere with the ability of the executive branch to perform its constitutionally assigned duties, and would thus violate the constitutional separation of powers. No court has addressed this question directly, but the judicial precedents that bear on the continuing vaUdity of our constitutional analysis are consistent with both the analytic approach taken and the conclusions reached. Our view remains that a sitting President is constitutionally immune from indictment and criminal prosecution. > Sprigman pointed out that five months after President Richard Nixon was named as an unindicted co-conspirator by prosecutors, he resigned from office before impeachment proceedings could be resolved. On 14 May 2017, Taylor updated his claim to say the indictment was coming “out of Eastern District of Virginia-under Dana Boente. Trump, Manafort and Flynn-among others under sealed indictment.” We asked the spokesman for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Eastern Virginia District whether this was true. He declined to comment. Even an opponent of the president didn’t buy into the indictment rumor. Seth Abramson, an assistant professor at the University of New Hampshire who used to work as a public defense attorney (and often rails against Trump on Twitter), told us subpoenas issued to associates of Trump’s former National Security Advisor Michael Flynn, as reported by CNN on 10 May 2017, indicated that the investigation was still in its early stages: < The information being passed around Facebook and Twitter by Claude Taylor and Louise Mensch does not comport with American criminal procedure in any respect. Grand juries are regularly convened by federal and state courts as a matter of course, and cases are brought to them as prosecutors develop them to the point of seeking an indictment. It would surprise no one if there’s a sitting grand jury in Virginia able to hear proffers or witnesses or other evidence from prosecutors working on the Russia investigation, as this would happen in the normal course of business in a federal court. > On 17 May 2017, a week after President Trump fired FBI director James Comey amid the Bureau’s investigation into whether Trump’s campaign colluded with Russia’s election interference, Newsweek published an analysis on the subject. Comey’s firing has raised questions about obstruction of justice: < So what about criminal charges? The fact remains that impeachment is a political process. Criminal penalties or sentences cannot be levied by Congress. And federal lawyers in the Attorney General’s office have determined in the past that it’s unconstitutional to indict a sitting president because it would keep the executive branch from performing its job. “An impeachment proceeding is the only appropriate way to deal with a president while in office,” Assistant Attorney General Robert Dixon explained in 1973 in the first opinion of the Justice Department’s Office of Legal Counsel. That doesn’t mean presidents are above justice. Once they leave the White House, they could still face a criminal case over their actions before, during or after their stint in the Oval Office. > Whether or not an indictment has been issued against the president remains unclear, because the blog post is so vague and the sources anonymous. But as Sprigman pointed out, in terms of the investigation into accusations of collusion with the Russian government between President Trump and his associates, the country is in “terra incognita” — uncharted land. While no one really knows for certain (or the ones who do aren’t saying anything) legal experts are unconvinced an indictment has been made against Trump, because according to precedent, a sitting president would have to be fully impeached before being charged with a crime. It seems unlikely federal prosecutors would contradict the Department of Justice. But as Sprigman noted, the current situation defies precedent in many ways: < Indicting the president as a way of signaling Congress? God only knows. Things have been crazy lately, but if we’re looking at an indictment that would be very, very novel. >

Mensch, Louise, and Taylor, Claude.  “Sealed Indictment Granted Against Donald Trump.”    Patribotics.com.  13 May 2017.;Department of Justice.  “Amenability of the President:, Vice President and other Civil Officers to Federal Criminal Prosecution while in Office.”   24 September 1973.;Department of Justice Office of Legal Counsel.  “A Sitting Presidents Amemalbility to Indictment and Crimimal Prosecution.”   16 October 2000.;Perez, Evan, et al. “CNN Exclusive: Grand Jury Subpoenas Issued in FBI’s Russia Investigation.”   CNN. 10 May 2017.;Schouten, Fredreka.  “Trump Team Knew Michael Flynn Might Register as a Foreign Agent for Turkey Work.”    USA Today.  10 May 2017.;Price, Greg. “Is the President Above the Law? Trump Unlikely to Face Criminal Charges Unless He Is Impeached.”   Newsweek. 17 May 2017.;Zapotosky, Matt. “Comey Lays Out the Case That Trump Obstructed Justice.”   The Washington Post. 8 June 2017.

"hillary" AND "clinton" AND "offered" AND "plea" AND "deal" AND "server" AND "investigation" AND "august" AND "2017"
"clinton" AND "justice" AND "server"

was-hillary-clinton-offered-a-plea-deal-in-server-investigation-in-august-2017

was-hillary-clinton-offered-a-plea-deal-in-server-investigation-in-august-2017

The Justice Department offered Hillary Clinton a plea deal in mid-2017 after reopening an investigation into her handling of classified material on a private server.

On 8 August 2017, NewsMax author Ed Klein published an article (“Hillary’s Plea Bargain”) heavily insinuating that Hillary Clinton had been quietly offered a plea bargain due to the Justice Department’s belief that the former candidate was prosecutable on “a number of counts.” That claim rested on a solitary anonymous source, purportedly a “Clinton lawyer.” That designator was not further qualified or explained, and it seems contradictory that a lawyer purportedly working on Clinton’s behalf would leak such a potentially damaging tidbit about his client to the author of several anti-Clinton books. Klein claimed that “discussion” of a plea took place in July 2017 between the unnamed lawyer and “a high-ranking Justice Department” official: < The Justice Department has reopened the investigation of Hillary Clinton’s mishandling of classified material on her private email system while she was secretary of state, and is considering offering her a plea bargain if she will agree to plead guilty to charges of breaking the law, according to a Clinton attorney … During the exploratory talks with the prosecutor, the Clinton attorney was told that despite former FBI Director James Comey’s decision last July not to prosecute Hillary, the Justice Department has reexamined the email case and believes there are ample grounds for prosecuting Hillary on a number of counts. Under the Justice Department’s plea offer, Hillary would be required to sign a document admitting that she committed a prosecutable crime. In return, the DOJ would agree not to bring charges against Hillary in connection with the email probe. Also as part of the agreement, the Justice Department would not proceed with an investigation of Hillary’s pay to play deals with foreign governments and businessmen who contributed to the Clinton Foundation or who paid Bill Clinton exorbitant speaking fees. > The article concluded with a stipulation that the source had “cautioned that normally a plea is offered by a prosecutor only upon arraignment,” whereas Clinton had not been charged with any crime. No other news reports we located carried a version of the claim that was not sourced from Klein’s article, and his Twitter header suggests that he is perhaps emotionally invested in the prospect of Clinton’s theoretical indictment: < Despite doubling down on his remarks about the Clinton investigation, there seemed to be a discrepancy in communication, because after the article was published, he told [“America Talks Live’s” Miranda] Khan that the Department of Justice was “considering” reopening it, not that they had reopened it. “They are seriously thinking of reopening this investigation and therefore if she doesn’t take the plea agreement, which I agree with you, she almost certainly won’t, I think they will then proceed with this investigation and this is going to drag on for a long time and in a way balance the investigation that’s going on with President Donald Trump and his campaign advisers regarding so-called collusion with the Russians.” > The outlet was far from the first to take issue with Klein’s sourcing and attribution. In 2012, Politico reported: < On the other hand, his Clinton book was strewn with serious factual errors, truncated and distorted quotes, and the overall themes don’t gibe with any other serious accounts of Clinton’s life. The disdain for Klein’s previous efforts haven’t necessarily broken along political lines. > Of the same tome, conservative New York Post columnist John Podhoretz said in 2005: < Curious and revealing. Because if any book in recent memory reads as though it has been written out of greed — a greedy hunger to separate millions of conservative book buyers from their hard-earned 25 bucks — it is Ed Klein’s “The Truth About Hillary.” This is one of the most sordid volumes I’ve ever waded through. Thirty pages into it, I wanted to take a shower. Sixty pages into it, I wanted to be decontaminated. And 200 pages into it, I wanted someone to drive stakes through my eyes so I wouldn’t have to suffer through another word. It’s June 2005. Hillary Clinton has been a major public figure in the United States for nearly 15 years. Somehow I imagine that if, indeed, she had “embraced” lesbianism “as a revolutionary concept” during her college years — years that have been written about exhaustively — we would have heard about it before now … We also probably would have heard by now that Bill Clinton learned Hillary was pregnant with Chelsea by reading about it in an Arkansas newspaper. This detail is offered up by a single source — an “investment banker from New York” — in the course of a story about how Bill “raped” Hillary while on vacation in Bermuda in 1979. > Coupled with the claim was a second assertion that Clinton never bothered to inform her husband she was pregnant. In 2005, Klein (in his own words) “dial[ed] back” during an interview about the passage on C-SPAN2, essentially retracting the claim in its entirety: < HOST: OK. Is it true that Bill Clinton found out that his wife was expecting by reading the newspaper? KLEIN: Yes. HOST: Tell us a little bit more about that. KLEIN: Well, let me actually dial back. HOST: All right. KLEIN: I suspect that Bill Clinton knew that his wife was pregnant since she was pregnant for three months by the time the announcement came out. But it is true that the announcement was not made in the names of Governor and Mrs. Clinton or Governor and Ms. Rodham as she was then known, but was made in her name alone, and that she made the announcement and Bill Clinton said to my source, whom he was speaking to on the phone, “Guess what, you’ll never — you’ll never believe this, but I’m sitting here reading that Hillary has announced she’s pregnant.” That’s how he found out that she — HOST: The announcement had been made. KLEIN: The announcement had been made. > In 2014, The Guardian reviewed a subsequent Clinton book, Blood Feud: < On a sunny afternoon in May last year, we are told, Hillary Clinton gathered six girlfriends from Wellesley’s class of 1969 for a boozy lunch at Le Jardin du Roi, a bistro near her home in Chappaqua, New York. Recently liberated from the State Department, Clinton is said to have let loose on her erstwhile boss, accusing President Obama of having “no hand on the fucking tiller”. Klein discloses breathlessly that “the wines had been carefully chosen by Roi, the owner of the restaurant,” and that “Roi waited on Hillary personally and prepared a special vegan dish for her after the former first lady told him that she was trying to lose weight.” There is, however, a problem with this centrepiece of Blood Feud’s prologue. Le Jardin du Roi was not named after the backyard of a man called Roi. It means “The Garden of the King”, or “The King’s Garden” in French. “It’s just the name of the restaurant,” a puzzled staff member told the Guardian when reached by telephone. The name of the man who owns the restaurant is Joe. This is not the first glaring factual error to have made its way into Klein’s reporting. It is not even the first time a mistake has been made in the very first anecdote of one of his books … Two publishing industry sources familiar with the situation confirmed a report by BuzzFeed [in 2014] that Blood Feud had been dropped by its original publisher, William Morrow, because the content did not pass a vetting by in-house lawyers. “When you’re at an imprint of HarperCollins, which is part of NewsCorp, they take that stuff very seriously, and they check all of your sources and notes and they want to know where you got stuff,” said one. > Klein’s suggestion that Hillary Clinton was to be indicted and had already been offered a plea deal quickly travelled through hyperpartisan corners of the Internet, but a number of criticisms of Klein’s relationships with facts and sources have dogged his work from at least 2005, with numerous prominent conservative journalists among his most vocal critics.Â

Klein, Ed.  “Hillary’s Plea Bargain.”   NewsMax.  8 August 2017.;Podhoretz, John.  “Smear For Profit.”   New York Post.  22 June 2005.;Swaine, Jon.  “Edward Klein: The Difference Between The Truth And A Lie.”   The Guardian.  14 July 2014.;Taylor, Sarah.  “Report: Hillary Clinton Email Investigation Reopened — Clinton Purportedly Offered Plea Deal.”   The Blaze.  9 August 2017.;Thrush, Glenn.  “Ed Klein’s Obama Book Debuts At #1 On Times List — Knocks Caro To #2.”   Politico.  24 May 2012.

aaron-rodgers-stand-for-the-flag-kneel-for-the-cross-t-shirt

aaron-rodgers-stand-for-the-flag-kneel-for-the-cross-t-shirt

A photograph shows Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers holding a "Stand for the flag, Kneel for the cross" shirt.

An image purportedly showing Green Bay Packers quarterback Aaron Rodgers holding a “Stand for the flag, kneel for the cross” shirt circulated online in September 2017 amidst the controversy over players kneeling during the national anthem in protest of inequality and police brutality: This is not a genuine photograph of Aaron Rodgers. Both the pictured person’s face and the t-shirt design have been altered. The original image was taken in the gift lounge at the MGM Grand Arena during the 48th Annual Academy of Country Music Awards on 7 April 2013 and showed musician George Strait holding a “Straight Shootin Country Boy” t-shirt. That photograph, available via Getty Images, was used as the basis to create several other promotional images of Straight holding up various t-shirts: Surprisingly, this image has also been doctored to sell products unrelated to George Straight related. In addition to changing the t-shirt design, some vendors also placed another person’s face on Straight’s body in order to sell a variety of merchandise. We found versions of this image featuring musician Willie Nelson, actor Kit Harington, President Donald Trump, and New England Patriots Coach Bill Belichick: Doctoring an image to make it appear as if a celebrity is wearing (or endorsing) a clothing item is a common tactic amongst some t-shirt vendors. The doctored image of comedian Bill Murray and author Hunter S. Thompson wearing vulgar t-shirts, for instance, originated with a promotional campaign. In this case, the doctored message on the shirt appears to counter the quarterback’s actual beliefs about the “take a knee” protests. Before the Packers game on 24 September 2017, Rodgers linked arms with his teammates to show solidarity during the national anthem. He also posted a photograph of himself and other players kneeling along with the hashtag #unity:  <  #unity #brotherhood #family #dedication #love # A post shared by Aaron Rodgers (@aaronrodgers12) on Sep 24, 2017 at 6:34am PDT > Â

Kelley, Seth.  “Aaron Rodgers, Tom Brady and More NFL Players Weigh in on National Anthem Protests.”   Variety.  24 September 2017.

trump-spray-tan-oval-office

trump-spray-tan-oval-office

An image shows President Trump getting a spray tan in the oval office.

An image purportedly showing President Donald Trump receiving a spray tan while nude in the oval office was widely circulated on social media after it was posted by the Twitter account @Defeat_GOP on 14 October 2017: The man in the image is not Donald Trump. This photograph was taken by Alison Jackson, an artist known for using celebrity lookalikes to create staged paparazzi-style images. A description of Jackson’s work appears on her web site: < Alison Jackson is renown for her explorations into how photography and the cult of the celebrity have transformed our relationship to what is ‘real’. Her notorious photographic portraits, life-like sculptures, films and videos are startlingly realistically staged affairs that cast uncannily styled actors into an entirely fathomable projection of a future that could have been; or the intimate, often salacious, imagined private moments of media icons such as Diana Princess of Wales, the Queen of England, Marilyn Monroe, George Bush, Brad and Angelina, and David Beckham. Jackson’s productions stress-test the implicit belief that a photograph can capture a frozen moment of ‘truth’. > This isn’t the first one of Jackson’s photographs to fool unsuspecting internet users. We’ve also covered one of Jackson’s images purportedly showing a nude Bill Clinton receiving a massage, and another image purportedly showing President Trump at a Ku Klux Klan rally. Jackson also created several other images featuring a Trump lookalike performing questionable activities in the oval office. Those photographs, along with other staged images featuring celebrity lookalikes, appear in Jackson’s book Private.

England, Charlotte.  “British Artist Continues to Publish Spoof Photos of Donald Trump Despite Risk of Being Sued.”   The Independent.  10 December 2016.

army-football-team-kneel-protest-national-anthem

army-football-team-kneel-protest-national-anthem

A photograph shows the Army football team kneeling in protest during the national anthem.

As an increasing number of football (and some baseball) players began kneeling in protest of police brutality during the national anthem in the fall of 2017, critics claimed that the protest was disrespectful to veterans. A popular photograph that purportedly showed the U.S. Military Academy team, the Army Black Knights, kneeling before a game appeared to throw a wrench into this line of argument: This photograph, however, actually shows the Navy Midshipmen kneeling in prayer before a game against the University of Tulsa. It has nothing to do with the “take a knee” protests. The gold lettering in the end zone appears to spell out the word “Golden Hurricane,” the name of the football team for the University of Tulsa. This is even more apparent when compared to a still shot of the university’s field: We reached out to Tulsa University for more information about the photograph, and a Chris Maxon, director of the Golden Hurricane Club, told us by email that the team pictured was most likely the Navy Midshipmen, who played Tulsa on 30 September 2017. Maxon said: < This appears to be the Navy football team prior to the game against Tulsa last Saturday. This did not take place during the national anthem. > Scott Strasemeier, a senior associate athletic director for sports information at Navy Sports, confirmed that the picture shows members of the Navy football team kneeling in prayer — not protest — before the game. Strasemeier also told us that both the Navy and Tulsa teams were in the locker room during the national anthem, which is typical for college football.Â

Wagner, Bill.  “Quarterback Abey Runs Wild as Navy Rallies to Down Tulsa, 31-21.”   Capital Gazette.  30 September 2017.

popeyes-manager-chicken-cocaine

popeyes-manager-chicken-cocaine