Did the Taliban Endorse Trump While Scientific Community Endorsed Biden?
Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here As the 2020 U.S. presidential election inched closer, the internet was flooded with misleading memes about both candidates, including the allegation that extremist organizations like the Taliban and Ku Klux Klan supported U.S. President Donald Trump, while the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and other bipartisan groups openly endorsed Democratic candidate Joe Biden. The claims were first put forth by screenwriter and author Bess Kalb, whose work has been featured on "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" and The New Yorker. In a Twitter post shared on Oct. 11, she suggested that extremist groups supported Trump while implying that more even-keeled organizations backed Biden. At the time of publication, the tweet had received more than 370,000 likes.  post   Although Kalb didn't specify in the tweet which candidate received endorsements from whom, it was perfectly clear to anyone following news about the presidential campaigns at the time which was which: Biden's endorsers included the magazine Scientific American, and the Trump campaign had publicly rejected an alleged endorsement from the Taliban. To verify Kalb's claim, we broke it down into four sections to address each of her assertions. Like much viral content, her statement contained kernels of truth that had been taken out of context or were inaccurately represented. In October 2020, CBS News claimed to have spoken with Zubihullah Mujahid, a spokesperson of the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, or Taliban, who allegedly told the publication that the extremist group believed that Trump would win the November 2020 election. In an exclusive telephone interview, Mujahid reportedly said that Trump had "proved himself a politician who accomplished all the major promises he had made to American people."  claimed Another senior Taliban leader said that the organization hoped Trump will win the election and wind up U.S. military presence in Afghanistan." CBS News added that the Talibans enthusiasm for Trump is grounded in the goal they share of getting U.S. troops out of Afghanistan after 19 years of war  a longtime promise of the president. However, Mujahid denied the claims made by CBS News and wrote in an Oct. 10 tweet that the publication had misinterpreted his remarks. A subsequently translated tweet shared as a comment added that nothing like what they published has happened. wrote Oct. 10 translated tweet   Tim Murtaugh, a spokesperson for the Trump campaign, told Axios in an emailed statement, We reject their support and the Taliban should know that the President will always protect American interests by any means necessary, unlike Joe Biden who opposed taking out Osama bin Laden and Qasem Soleimani." In an Oct. 10 tweet, Murtaugh added that he had told CBS News that the Trump campaign rejected the endorsement. Axios tweet   Snopes attempted to contact Murtaugh on Twitter but did not receive a response in time for publication. Our message to the Trump campaign also went unanswered. At the announcement of Trumps 2016 bid, the KKK published a full-page spread supporting Trump in its official quarterly newspaper, The Crusader. In an interview with MSNBC, Trump said that that he disavowed former KKK leader David Duke and that his campaign rejected the endorsement, issuing the following statement to news outlets in 2016: full-page spread disavowed statement Mr. Trump and the campaign denounces hate in any form. This publication is repulsive and their views do not represent the tens of millions of Americans who are uniting behind our campaign.   The KKK endorsement followed the Trump presidency for years. It resurfaced again in January 2020 when a manipulated photo claimed to show a group of KKK members marching behind a campaign sign for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. A message accompanying the meme at the time claimed, This is all you need to know about why you should vote Blue in 2020. As our previous fact check concluded, the photograph in question was not genuine  it was taken during a march in Pulaski, Tennessee, in July 2009. The banner actually read, Fraternal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan. manipulated photo  Spencer Platt / Staff  White supremacist and former Grand Wizard David Duke, whose Twitter account was suspended in October 2020, has expressed support for Trump on more than one occasion. In a video shared to Twitter by verified photojournalist Mykal McEldowney of the Indy Star (which has been archived here) from the Aug. 12, 2017, Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, the former KKK leader offered support to the president.  Twitter account suspended expressed support more than one occasion shared here Were going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. Thats what we believed in. Thats why we voted for Donald Trump  because he said hes going to take our country back. And thats what we had to do.  Trump expressed disapproval of Duke and disavowed white supremacy on "Good Morning America" in 2016. During a televised debate on Sept. 29, 2020, the president was asked to clearly and explicitly condemn white supremacy, which he failed to do on that occasion, though he did condemn "all white supremacists," mentioning the KKK specifically, during a Fox News interview two days later. expressed "Good Morning America" asked condemn NEJM, an esteemed medical journal that publishes research and reviews articles, took an unprecedented step when it published an Oct. 8 editorial urging voters to render judgment on the current political leaders, adding that they were dangerously incompetent in their ignorance and handling of the pandemic. Oct. 8 editorial The column, titled Dying in a Leadership Vacuum, did not explicitly name Trump, nor did it acknowledge Biden. Rather, it laid blame on a failing leadership and administration that inadequately responded to the COVID-19 pandemic, further polarizing and politicizing Americans while disenfranchising vulnerable communities and leaving behind health care professionals who have put their lives on the line. By making masks political tools rather than effective infection control measures, continuing to push inaccurate guidelines, and deferring to pandemic responses at the state level  many of which did not have adequate resources to fight such a public health crisis without the support of the federal government  the publication argued that U.S. leaders ignored and even denigrate[d] experts, furthering that the COVID-19 response a was a failure that had taken a crisis and turned it into a tragedy. The editorial went on to say the following: The response of our nations leaders has been consistently inadequate. The federal government has largely abandoned disease control to the states. Governors have varied in their responses, not so much by party as by competence. But whatever their competence, governors do not have the tools that Washington controls. Instead of using those tools, the federal government has undermined them. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which was the worlds leading disease response organization, has been eviscerated and has suffered dramatic testing and policy failures. The National Institutes of Health have played a key role in vaccine development but have been excluded from much crucial government decision making. And the Food and Drug Administration has been shamefully politicized, appearing to respond to pressure from the administration rather than scientific evidence. Our current leaders have undercut trust in science and in government, causing damage that will certainly outlast them. Instead of relying on expertise, the administration has turned to uninformed opinion leaders and charlatans who obscure the truth and facilitate the promulgation of outright lies. [] Anyone else who recklessly squandered lives and money in this way would be suffering legal consequences. Our leaders have largely claimed immunity for their actions. But this election gives us the power to render judgment. Reasonable people will certainly disagree about the many political positions taken by candidates. But truth is neither liberal nor conservative. When it comes to the response to the largest public health crisis of our time, our current political leaders have demonstrated that they are dangerously incompetent. We should not abet them and enable the deaths of thousands more Americans by allowing them to keep their jobs. It is unclear what broad bipartisan coalition Kalb refers to in her tweet; however, both candidates indeed have a long list of endorsements from both sides of the political aisle. Most notably, in mid-September Scientific American backed Biden, marking it the second publication to break stride in endorsing a presidential candidate for the first time in its history. Again, the editorial board cited Trumps rejection of science and pandemic response as a catalyst. Scientific American "The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people  because he rejects evidence and science. The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives by the middle of September," wrote the publication. 190,000 Americans their lives "He has also attacked environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges. That is why we urge you to vote for Joe Biden, who is offering fact-based plans to protect our health, our economy and the environment. These and other proposals he has put forth can set the country back on course for a safer, more prosperous and more equitable future." A list of endorsements from political leaders and labor unions can be found on Bidens official campaign website, but as with most political candidates, the majority of his endorsers are partisan. Those include activist groups built around the platforms of LGBTQ, environmental, animal, womens reproductive rights, and labor unions representing dozens of industries from across the nation. That being said, a number of established newspapers have also endorsed the former vice president, including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Boston Globe. By comparison, Trump is backed by activist groups that include religious organizations, law enforcement, and pro-life organizations. Trump has been endorsed by a handful of publications, including The Boston Herald and The Tulsa Beacon. (You can view a full list of Trump endorsements here.) list The Washington Post The New York Times The Boston Globe The Boston Herald The Tulsa Beacon here In the weeks that led up to the general election in 2020, discord and contention dominated U.S. political discourse. As with many viral and political posts, memes, videos, or content, elements of truth are not fully represented in a short character count. Generally speaking, this claim was based in truth but lacked the context needed to characterize both the Trump and Biden campaigns accurately. Goddard, Emily.  "Taliban Denise Endorsing Trump."
  Independent.  11 Oct. 2020.  Yousafzai, Sami.  "The Taliban on Trump: We Hope He Will Win the Election and Withdraw U.S. Troops."
  CBS News.  11 Oct. 2020.  Falconer, Rebecca.  "Trump Campaign Rejects Talibans Endorsement for U.S. President."
  Axios.  11 Oct. 2020.  Levine, Jon.  Osama bin Ladens Niece Says Only Trump Can Prevent Another 9/11."
  New York Post.  5 Sept. 2020.  Furr, Amy.  "Osama bin Ladens Niece: Only President Trump Can Stop Second 9/11-Style Attack."
  Breitbart.  5 Sept. 2020.  Begly, Sarah.  "The KKKs Newspapers Has Endorsed Donald Trump."
  Time.  2 Nov. 2020.  Evon, Dan.  "Did the KKK March With a Trump-Pence Sign?"
  Snopes.  13 Jan. 2020.  Sherman, Amy.  "Joe Biden Says President Trump Hasnt Condemned David Duke and Richard Spencer."
  PolitiFact.  Publication date.   "Donald Trump Speaks Out on the KKK, Super Tuesday."
  ABC News.  MacGuill, Dan.  "Did Trump Refuse to Condemn White Supremacists at Debate?"
  Snopes.  30 Sept. 2020.  Shepherd, Katie.  "The New England Journal of Medicine Avoided Politics for 208 Years. Now Its Urging Voters to Oust Trump."
  The Washington Post.  8 Oct. 2020.   "Dying in a Leadership Vacuum."
  New England Journal of Medicine.  8 Oct. 2020.  Scientific American.  "Scientific American Endorses Joe Biden."
  October 2020.  Washington Post Editorial Board.  "Joe Biden for President."
  The Washington Post.  28 Sept. 2020.  The Boston Globe.  "The Globe Endorses Joe Biden for President."
  6 Oct. 2020.  Nelson, Libby.  "'Why We Voted for Donald Trump': David Duke Explains the White Supremacist Charlottesville Protests."
  Vox.  12 Aug. 2020.  Sakuma, Amanda.  "KKK Paper The Crusader Backs Trump; Campaign Rejects It."
  NBC News.  2 Nov. 2020.  Naughtie, Andrew.  "Former KKK Leader Endorses Trump for President Again  and Tucker Carlson for VP."
  Independent.  9 July 2020.  Diaz, Daniella.  "Trump Campaign Denounces KKKs Official Newspapers Support."
  CNN.  2 Nov. 2020.  Timm, Jane.  "Donald Trumps Oral History of David Duke and White Supremacists."
  NBC News.  29 Nov. 2016.  Detrow, Scott.  "KKK Paper Endorses Trump; Campaign Calls Outlet Repulsive.
  NPR.  2 Nov. 2016.
Well-rounded vegan diets may be less hazardous and better for the health of dogs compared to conventional meat or raw meat diets, according to research published in April 2022.  Pets are multibillion-dollar industries. According to estimates published in 2018, there are 471 million pet dogs and 373 million pet cats worldwide, which sets the international worth of pet food sales at nearly 132 billion euros. Such high demand has a large impact on the environment, particularly in the sourcing of the animal and agricultural products that make up pet food. Feeding pets is also a lucrative market. In 2020, the vegan pet food market alone was worth $8.7 billion in the U.S., and was expected to grow to over $15 billion in the next six years expected Because pets and their nutrition represent large shares of both the economy and its production line, researchers at the University of Winchester in the U.K. set out to determine what diets are best for the health of pets. To determine the links between diet and health, the team advertised an online survey through social media between May and December 2020 to determine the links between diet and health, and analyzed the data of more than 2,500 dogs that were included in survey responses from the pets' guardians.  Each dog had been living with its guardian for at least one year. About half were fed conventional meat-based diets, around one-third raw meat, and 13% were fed a vegan diet. The survey included questions about the dogs health, such as veterinary visits, medications, and overall health disorders, and consulted both the guardian and a veterinarian on its health status.  We believe our study of 2,536 dogs is by far the largest study published to date, exploring health outcomes of dogs fed vegan and meat-based diets, wrote the researchers in a news release.  news release It analyzed a range of objective data, as well as owner opinions and reported veterinary assessments of health. It revealed that the healthiest and least hazardous dietary choices for dogs, are nutritionally sound vegan diets.   Figures show the three main diets fed to the 2,536 dogs included in the survey. PLOS One  PLOS One Publishing their work in the peer-reviewed journal PLOS One, the team found that overall, dogs on conventional meat diets were less healthy than those on raw meat or vegan diets. Previously it was thought that raw meat diets were linked to an increased risk of pathogen exposure, while vegan diets may result in nutritional deficiencies. But when necessary hygienic and nutritional supplements were taken into consideration, both diets were, by and large, shown to be healthier and less hazardous to the canine consumer.  peer-reviewed PLOS One In summary, when jointly considering health outcomes and dietary hazards, our results and those of other studies indicate that the healthiest and least hazardous dietary choices for dogs, are nutritionally sound vegan diets, concluded the researchers. However, there are several limitations to the study that should be taken into consideration. For one, it could be the case that dogs given a raw meat diet were not necessarily healthier than those given a conventional diet, but rather that their guardians might have been less likely to take their pets to a veterinarian. Because the frequency of veterinarian visits was considered a health indication, this internal bias may have skewed the results. Furthermore, dogs given a raw meat diet tended to be younger in age than those eating other diets, which could further explain why they were deemed healthier.  The study authors also didnt factor in the sex or breed of each dog, a limitation that may have influence the results given that certain breeds are more prone to illness than others.  Lets also look at the structure of the study itself. Participating guardians were asked to consider the main ingredients within your pets normal diet, which means that a pet may not have been fed the identified diet exclusively, nor were treats or other dietary supplements excluded. It was also an opinion-based study in which respondents gave their thoughts on a dogs health in a non-standardized way. Additionally, because the survey was conducted online, this required that respondents have internet access and the time necessary to complete the survey, which may have excluded pet guardians of lower income statuses.  Lastly, there is an inherent unconscious bias within the study structure, which means that a given guardian might have been expecting a better health outcome based on the preferred diet, and this expectation could have influenced how they responded to the survey question.  While there is now scientific evidence to suggest that both raw meat and vegan diets are better than conventional diets alone, the study authors said more research is needed to determine which of the two is associated with better dog health outcomes. Dog guardians should ensure that all aspects of their dogs nutrition are being met, regardless of primary diet preference. Check pet food labels and check with manufacturers to make sure that healthy practices are in place to provide nutritional soundness.  https://www.theinsightpartners.com, The Insight Partners. Vegan Pet Food Market to Grow at a CAGR of 7.7% to Reach US$ 15,651.22 Million from 2020 to 2028. The Insight Partners, https://www.theinsightpartners.com/reports/vegan-pet-food-market. Accessed 13 Apr. 2022. Vegan Pet Food Market to Grow at a CAGR of 7.7% to Reach US$ 15,651.22 Million from 2020 to 2028. The Insight Partners, https://www.theinsightpartners.com/reports/vegan-pet-food-market. Accessed 13 Apr. 2022. Knight, Andrew, et al. Vegan versus Meat-Based Dog Food: Guardian-Reported Indicators of Health. PLOS ONE, vol. 17, no. 4, Apr. 2022, p. e0265662. PLoS Journals, https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0265662. Vegan Diets for Dogs May Be Linked with Better Health, and Could Be Less Hazardous, than Meat-Based Diets. EurekAlert!, https://www.eurekalert.org/news-releases/948887. Accessed 13 Apr. 2022. As a new year and a new legislative session begin, Wisconsin Republicans are looking to place limits on government benefits to residents. That issue will appear on the ballot for the April election, as lawmakersvoted last monthto include an advisory referendum asking voters whether people should be required to look for work to receive welfare benefits. It also arose on the Assembly floor Jan. 19, in a speech from Speaker Robin Vos, R-Rochester, about BadgerCare,the states health care coverage programfor low-income people and people with disabilities. Heres his full quote: Wisconsin has been a national leader in so many ways. Preliminary data shows that we have more people on BadgerCare today than we did before the pandemic. Why? Because we dont even ask people what their income level is to qualify for free health insurance from the government. So, on Day One, you qualify. On Day Two, you win the lottery. Youre a multimillionaire. You still get the benefits from the state. How is that right? Its not. There are a couple of claims in there  one being that Wisconsin has more people on BadgerCare today than before the pandemic, which we noted ina prior fact-check is correct. But what about his other claim  that you could be a multimillionaire and still get BadgerCare benefits? Is he right about that, too? Lets take a look. One important point that Vos statement doesnt quite make clear: There is always an initial check of peoples incomes to make sure they fit within the programs requirements before they can enroll in BadgerCare. Proof of income has always been required, Elizabeth Goodsitt, a state Department of Health Services spokesperson, said in an email. A spokesperson for Vos said the speakers phrasing, Day One, you qualify, referred to that first check. Fair enough. So what if the next day, a person gets a large influx of money and moves above the programs income limits? What happens next changed as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic. Before the pandemic, people were required to report an income change that could disqualify them from receiving benefits, and there were other external checks to ensure their incomes remained below that threshold. When the COVID-19 pandemic began, federal lawmakers passed theFamilies First Coronavirus Response Act. Among other things, it increased the number of federal dollars that states could be reimbursed for their Medicaid programs. To get that increase, though, states had toagree to keep people continuously enrolledin Medicaid coverage until the end of the public health emergency. The idea was to promote stable health care coverage during the pandemic. In other words, if people enrolled in BadgerCare in 2020, theyd have had coverage for the last almost three years without needing to renew it, even if their income changed. In a spending plan passed late last year, Congressset an end date for the continuous enrollment provision: March 31, 2023. After that date, Wisconsin and other states can start disenrolling people who no longer meet the requirements for that coverage. The law allows states a full year to complete that step and process renewals for those who will keep their coverage. This will surely take a while, with anestimated increase of almost 20 million people enrolledin Medicaid nationwide since the start of the pandemic, according to data from the Kaiser Family Foundation. Goodsitt said all members of BadgerCare will have their eligibility rechecked between June of this year and May 2024. Vos sidestepped that in his claim, suggesting its been a longstanding preferred practice of state policy. Still, since those eligibility checks are at least a few months away, a situation like Vos laid out is plausible at the moment. Vos argued that even a multimillionaire could receive BadgerCare benefits in Wisconsin, because, We dont even ask people what their income level is to qualify for free health care. But there is an initial income check to qualify for coverage. After that, starting on Day Two, a federal law passed during the pandemic prevents states from rechecking eligibility based on income  though that will end this spring. So, the overnight millionaire scenario Vos describes could theoretically happen  and individuals, because of a new job or other more modest income gains, could rise above the threshold. But Vos skirts past this not being something the state initiated, nor something the state can avoid. And it will end soon. We rate a statement Mostly True if it is accurate, but needs clarification or additional information. That fits here. In Ohio, where union workers are a major presence and the manufacturing economy is hurting, Sen. Barack Obama attacked Sen. Hillary Clinton for her position on the North American Free Trade Agreement, called NAFTA. Yesterday, Sen. Clinton also said I'm wrong to point out that she once supported NAFTA, Obama said. But the fact is, she was saying great things about NAFTA until she started running for president. A couple years after it passed, she said NAFTA was a 'free and fair trade agreement' and that it was 'proving its worth.' And in 2004, she said, 'I think, on balance, NAFTA has been good for New York state and America.' The Clinton campaign says Obama is wrong, that Clinton was critical of NAFTA long before she started running for president. We looked into Clinton's past remarks on NAFTA and concluded that she has changed her tune, from once speaking favorably about it to now saying the agreement needs fixing. The agreement goes back to the 1992 presidential campaign when Bill Clinton ran against incumbent President George H.W. Bush. On Aug. 12 of that year, Bush finished negotiating NAFTA with Mexico and Canada. During the campaign, Bill Clinton said he would support NAFTA if elected, but would demand supplemental agreements to protect worker rights, the environment and sudden import surges. After Clinton won the presidency, his administration negotiated the side agreements and made NAFTA one of its top priorities. Vice President Al Gore memorably debated Ross Perot about NAFTA on CNN's Larry King Live. Congress approved the agreements, and it was hailed as a major political victory for the new president. As first lady, Hillary Clinton publicly supported her husband's position. In 1996, in a visit with unionized garment workers, she said the words Obama now quotes. I think everybody is in favor of free and fair trade. I think NAFTA is proving its worth, said Clinton, according to an Associated Press report. Clinton wrote positively of her husband's efforts on NAFTA in her memoir Living History, published in 2003: Creating a free trade zone in North America  the largest free trade zone in the world  would expand U.S. exports, create jobs and ensure that our economy was reaping the benefits, not the burdens, of globalization. Although unpopular with labor unions, expanding trade opportunities was an important administration goal. During a 2004 teleconference on funding cuts for job training, Clinton was asked whether NAFTA should be revisited. She replied, I think that we have to enforce the trade rules that are inherent in NAFTA. I think on balance NAFTA has been good for New York and America, but I also think that there are a number of areas where we're not dealt with in an upfront way in dealing with our friend to the north, Canada, which seems to be able to come up with a number of rationales for keeping New York agricultural products out of Canada, she said. Today, Clinton's campaign Web site says plainly, NAFTA was negotiated more than 14 years ago, and Hillary believes it has not lived up to its promises. At a debate hosted by CNN in November 2007, Clinton said, NAFTA was a mistake to the extent that it did not deliver on what we had hoped it would, and that's why I call for a trade timeout. We should note that Clinton biographer Sally Bedell Smith has said that as first lady, Clinton opposed NAFTA privately but supported it publicly because it was important to her husband politically. However, this is not a point Clinton made in her own autobiography, where she wrote in favor of NAFTA. Now, there's the issue of whether Clinton changed her mind because she was running for president. Clinton surrogates say she made remarks against NAFTA as early as March 2000 when she was running for Senate in New York. We could not confirm those remarks independently. But, as we've noted, she made pro-NAFTA remarks as late as 2003 (her autobiography) and 2004 (a teleconference). We won't say Clinton was a huge cheerleader for NAFTA, but she did speak favorably of it. And now she says it needs to be fixed. Was running for president the cause of this switch, or was it a gradual change of thinking? It's hard to say; the balance of evidence does not point to a harsh pivot point. But when we balance her previous statements against her more recent statements, we find that she has changed her sentiments when she speaks about NAFTA. We rate Obama's charge True. The protracted, often bloody Israeli-Palestinian conflict exploded into a hot war on Oct. 7, 2023, when the militant Palestinian group Hamas launched a deadly attack on Israel and Israel retaliated by bombarding the Gaza Strip. More than 20,000 people, the vast majority of them Palestinians, were reportedly killed during the first two months of the war alone. The violence is driven by mutual hostilities and territorial ambitions dating back more than a century. The internet has become an unofficial front in that war and is rife with misinformation, which Snopes is dedicated to countering with facts and context. You can help. Read the latest fact checks. Submit questionable claims. Become a Snopes Member to support our work. We welcome your participation and feedback. Israeli-Palestinian conflict Hamas deadly attack on Israel retaliated were reportedly killed mutual hostilities Read Submit Become a Snopes Member feedback In January 2024, as Israels bombardment of Gaza continued, a pair of photographs went viral showing the apparent impact of the violence on Gazas universities. viral Al-Azhar University in the north of the Gaza Strip was targeted by Israeli forces in particular, and since late 2023, a number of posts on Reddit, TikTok and X appeared to show what the educational institution looked like "before" and "after" it was hit by Israeli strikes. targeted Reddit TikTok X    The above images accurately depict one of Al-Azhar Universitys buildings before and after military operations by Israel in Gaza. We found photographic evidence from reliable news sources as well as from the universitys official Facebook page verifying the claim, and as such rate this story as True. In November 2023, Al-Azhar University shared the before and after images in a Facebook post detailing the destruction that took place on the university campus after bombardment from Israel. One picture in particular showed the "before" version of the untouched building for the Faculty of King Hassan II For Environmental Sciences and Agriculture. November 2023 The post stated (English version via Google Translate): Part of the destruction and damage caused to university facilities and buildings as a result of the Israeli occupation forces bombing of the new university campus buildings south of Gaza City. (Screenshot via Facebook) We found images of this particular building from different angles in years prior including from the Moroccan press agency in 2021 that detailed a new specialty for Veterinary Medicine had been made available at the university. A news release from the Kingdom of Morocco noted that the facility had been reconstructed with Moroccos help and was inaugurated in 2015. angles Moroccan press agency news release On Nov. 22, 2023, Reuters published the photograph of the same building after it was destroyed, with the caption: The remains of Al-Azhar University of Gaza is seen, amid the ongoing ground operation of the Israeli army against Palestinian Islamist group Hamas, in the Gaza Strip, November 22, 2023. [...] EDITOR'S NOTE: REUTERS PHOTOGRAPHS WERE REVIEWED BY THE IDF AS PART OF THE CONDITIONS OF THE EMBED. NO PHOTOS WERE REMOVED. published (Screenshot via Reuters) We determined that this was the same structure as the one posted by the Al-Azhar University Facebook page by observing the matching architectural details, including the white domes atop the building, the remnants of the signage and arch at the front of the building. Geneva-based Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, an independent nonprofit organization, said Israel was systematically destroying universities in Gaza in stages, with the first stage including the bombing of the Islamic and Al-Azhar universities. said Getty Images also published photographs of other Al-Azhar University buildings that had been destroyed by the bombardment. A New York Times interactive from Dec. 12, 2023, mapped out all the neighborhoods with satellite imagery that lay in ruins from thousands of Israeli strikes and the ground invasion. Switching between the Before and Now tabs in the interactive, visible damage can be seen on Al-Azhar Universitys campus, as well as the noticeable Israeli tanks in the courtyard. published New York Times The Israeli military said they had destroyed buildings on Al-Azhar Universitys campus because the Hamas terror organization used the university building for the purpose of fighting against our forces. said They claimed to find: terror infrastructure, including an underground tunnel that ran from the university's yard and [continued] to a school one kilometer away. Furthermore, numerous weapons, including explosive devices, rocket parts, launchers, explosive device detonation systems, and several technological assets were located and taken for an intelligence analysis and investigation. claimed We were unable to determine independently if the Israeli militarys findings were true. According to an Al Jazeera report, in more than 100 days of Israeli bombardment, hundreds of schools, including those run by the United Nations, had been bombed and students and teachers killed. Centers of higher education, including universities, have been completely paralyzed and according to Wafa, a Palestinian news agency, 12 institutions of higher learning have been either damaged or destroyed. Al Jazeera Wafa Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor said the Israeli army killed 94 university professors along with hundreds of teachers, and called the attacks an intentional destruction of Palestinian cultural and historical properties including universities, schools, libraries, and archives. said 26 November 2023, Palestinian Territories, Gaza City: Palestinians... Getty Images, https://www.gettyimages.com/detail/news-photo/november-2023-palestinian-territories-gaza-city-news-photo/1803522346. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Fabian, Emanuel. IDF Says It Destroyed Buildings Containing Hamas Infrastructure at Gaza Citys Al-Azhar University. Times of Israel, 8 Dec. 2023, https://www.timesofisrael.com/liveblog_entry/idf-says-it-destroyed-buildings-containing-hamas-infrastructure-at-gaza-citys-al-azhar-university/.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Hassan II Faculty of Gaza, New Vision of Agricultural and Environmental Sciences. Map Ecology, 1 Mar. 2021, https://mapecology.ma/en/slider-en/hassan-ii-faculty-gaza-new-vision-agricultural-environmental-sciences/.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Holder, Josh. Gaza After Nine Weeks of War. The New York Times, 12 Dec. 2023. NYTimes.com, https://www.nytimes.com/interactive/2023/12/12/world/middleeast/gaza-strip-satellite-images-israel-invasion.html.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. How Israel Has Destroyed Gazas Schools and Universities. Al Jazeera, 24 Jan. 2024. https://www.aljazeera.com/news/2024/1/24/how-israel-has-destroyed-gazas-schools-and-universities. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Israel Kills Dozens of Academics, Destroys Every University in the Gaza Strip. Euro-Med Human Rights Monitor, 20 Jan. 2024. https://euromedmonitor.org/en/article/6108/Israel-kills-dozens-of-academics,-destroys-every-university-in-the-Gaza-Strip. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. "GAZA: Inauguration of Hassan II Faculty Financed by King Mohammed VI." Morocco World News, Aug. 2015. https://www.moroccoworldnews.com/2015/08/166428/gaza-inauguration-of-hassan-ii-faculty-financed-by-king-mohammed-vi. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. "ISRAEL-PALESTINIANS/GAZA-EMBED." Reuters Pictures, Nov. 22, 2023. https://pictures.reuters.com/CS.aspx?VP3=SearchResult&VBID=2C0FCIXDNCBY70&SMLS=1&RW=1437&RH=685&POPUPPN=1&POPUPIID=2C0FQEP2VUCPS. Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Upon Kings Order, Islamic Affairs Minister Takes Part in Inauguration of Hassan II Faculty in Gaza. Kingdom of Morocco, 24 Aug. 2015, https://www.maroc.ma/en/news/upon-kings-order-islamic-affairs-minister-takes-part-inauguration-hassan-ii-faculty-gaza.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. Weapons Found in Al-Azhar University. Israeli Defense Forces, 8 Dec. 2023, https://www.idf.il/en/mini-sites/hamas-israel-war-24/war-on-hamas-2023-resources/weapons-found-in-al-azhar-university/.Accessed 26 Jan. 2024. The American corporation has long been a target, especially in online debate, of criticism and condemnation  sometimes well-founded and justified, but at other times irrelevant and wrong-headed.  According to a theory advanced by Academy Award-nominated director Adam McKay, there is a direct link between the modern corporation and 1930's style fascism  one that Merriam-Webster even went so far as to censor from its definition of fascism following a corporate takeover in the 1980s.  In April 2018, McKay's words were turned into a widely-shared online meme published by the Facebook page "Americans Against Fascism": meme Benito Mussolini created the word "fascism." He defined it as "the merging of the state and the corporation." He also said a more accurate word would be "corporatism." This was the definition in Webster's up until 1987 when a corporation bought Webster's and changed it to exclude any mention of corporations."  Adam McKay.    The quote is taken word for word from a 2010 op-ed written by McKay for the Huffington Post, in which he offered a scathing criticism of large corporations and the recent Citizens United decision in the U.S. Supreme Court. (He accused four of the court's justices of treason.) op-ed McKay's account is riddled with errors. For one thing, the definition of fascism commonly attributed to Mussolini is "the merging of the state and corporate power," not "the corporation," as McKay presents it. Second, it's not clear that Mussolini  or even his ghostwriter, the philosopher Giovanni Gentile  ever actually gave this precise definition of fascism.  not clear Most importantly, though, the meme's central point revolves around a common misunderstanding of what "corporatism" was in Mussolini's fascism and a conflation with the modern capitalist "corporation," most likely borne out of the similarity between the words. Corporatism ("corporativismo" in Italian) was one of the cornerstone principles in Mussolini's fascism, and had to do with the way society and the economy would be organized, with state power at the head of a system of guilds or corporations ("corporazione") representing each major industry.  In his Dictionary of Political Thought, Roger Scruton describes corporatism in this way: this way The economy was divided into associations (called syndicates) of workers, employers and the professions; only one syndicate was allowed in each branch of industry, and all officials were either fascist politicians or else loyal to the fascist cause. According to law the syndicates were autonomous, but in fact they were run by the state. The corporations united the syndicates in a given industry, but made no pretence at autonomy from the state. This ultimate power and pervasive influence of the state (led by one man, of course) was famously summed up by Mussolini in a speech in 1927, in which he declared: "everything in the state, nothing against the State, nothing outside the state."  declared In the Doctrine of Fascism, in 1932, Mussolini (with the help of Gentile) wrote: wrote Fascism desires the State to be strong and organic, based on broad foundations of popular support. The Fascist State lays claim to rule in the economic field no less than in others; it makes its action felt throughout the length and breadth of the country by means of its corporative, social, and educational institutions, and all the political, economic, and spiritual forces of the nation, organized in their respective associations, circulate within the State. In other words, corporatism in Mussolini's fascism was not a free-market capitalist system. Far from it. It did not allow for the kind of competition, innovation, market entry, and research and development characteristic of modern capitalism, and it was closely ruled in every way by the state with Mussolini at its head.  Anything that draws a direct link between what are now referred to as corporations (large, powerful private companies operating in a modern free-market capitalist system) and Mussolini's corporatism, is founded on a misunderstanding  most likely caused by the similarity between the words.  As for the claim that Webster's dictionary censored its definition of fascism when it was taken over by a public relations-sensitive corporation in 1987: Merriam-Webster has in fact been owned by Encyclopedia Brittanica Incorporated since 1964, and has operated as Merriam-Webster Incorporated since 1982; that claim is inaccurate. owned Bier, Daniel. "Fake Quote Files: Benito Mussolini on Fascism and Corporatism."
The Skeptical Libertarian. 7 February 2013. Berlet, Chip. "Mussolini on the Corporate State."
 Political Research Associates. January 2005. Scruton, Roger. "The Palgrave Macmillan Dictionary of Political Thought."
 Palgrave Macmillan. 3rd Edition 2007. Mussolini, Benito; Gentile, Giovanni. "The Doctrine of Fascism."
 Fascism: Doctrine and Institutions/World Future Fund. 1935. On 1 April 2016, the web site Breitbart published an article reporting that a California man posing as a woman had been arrested after filming women in the bathroom of a Macy's department store: article A Palmdale, California, man wearing womens clothing was arrested in a Lancaster Macys store after he was seen in a womens bathroom. The man was allegedly videotaping women in the bathroom. Jason Pomare, 33, was arrested over the weekend after mall security officers learned he had been hanging out in a Macys department store womens bathroom. The security guards contacted a Los Angeles County Sheriffs Department (LASD) deputy who found the cross-dressing man in a mall storage area, NBC Los Angeles reported. Breitbart also tied the story to anti-discrimination ordinances regarding bathroom usage by transgender people: It is not clear if Lancaster has a bathroom ordinance like the one defeated in Houston last year where men would legally be allowed to enter womens bathrooms and locker rooms. Breitbart Texas Lana Shadwick covered the defeat of that ordinance in Houston. Pomare was not charged with any offenses related to being in the womens bathroom other than the illegal filming. On 12 April 2016, the web site Daily Headlines published the same story, citing Breitbart as a source, and inaccurately confusing using bathrooms with filming inside them: published A man from Palmdale, California, wearing a bra and dress enters the ladies bathroom at Macys and what happens next should not surprise you. The man, Jason Pomare, 33, entered the bathroom which the ACLU and the liberal elitists in this country say is his God given right. He sets up a hidden camera in one of the stalls and for the next two hours, tapes women using the bathroom. Eventually, one woman noticed the camera with the record light on and notified mall security, who arrested Pomare. There was absolutely no way for anyone to see this coming, was there? (Removes tongue from cheek) Although Breitbart provided a link to the source for their report, the site either didn't bother to check that source's date or deliberately misrepresented the incident in order to leverage more interest in it. The linked news articlefrom Los Angeles television station KNBC was clearly dated 13 May 2013 (not 2016, or "last weekend"): article    KNBC's 2013 reporting described an unambiguous violation of the law. The incident had nothing to do with bathroom ordinances, itinvolved unquestionablyillegal actions, and the individual identifiedwas arrested and charged: bathroom ordinances Charges were filed against a man who wore a wig and women's clothing to disguise himself as he allegedly used a concealed camera to record "hours" of video of women in a Los Angeles-area department store restroom. Jason Pomare, 33, of Palmdale, was arrested after customers contacted security officers at a Macy's store to report a man in the women's restroom. The security officers contacted a deputy, who was on patrol at the Antelope Valley Mall (map) when he saw a man matching the subject's description leave the store. Pomare was charged with six counts of unlawful use of a concealed camera for purposes of sexual gratification. After his arrest, investigators said a video camera found in his purse had "hours" of video of women using the restroom inside the store. (Pomare's arrest was alsoreported by the Antelope Valley Times in May 2013.) reported  Neither Breitbart nor Daily Headlines updated their articles to note that the incident hadn't taken place in April 2016, and that the arrest occurred well prior to the passage of any prominent bathroom ordinances. And both sitesfailed to take into account that more recent non-discrimination ordinances haven't legalized filming bathroom occupants, no matter what their gender identity might be. non-discrimination ordinances Pomare was charged with six counts of unlawful use of a concealed camera for the purposes of sexual gratification, a charge that would alsobe applicable in any jurisdiction that permitted transgender individuals to use bathrooms aligned with their gender. Ordinances of that nature haveno provisions permittingthe surreptitious filming of bathroom occupants for personal sexual gratification (or any other reason), nor have such provisions been sought or suggested by anyone.  Dilworth, M.  "Palmdale Man Arrested for Videotaping in Women's Bathroom."
  The Antelope Valley Times.  14 May 2013. Klemack, John Cadiz and Jonathan Lloyd.   "Man Disguised as Woman Recorded "Hours" of Mall Restroom Video: Investigators."
    KNBC-TV [Los Angeles].   14 May 2013. Claim: Three suspicious Middle Eastern men (later found to be likely ISIS operatives)attemptedto purchase vehicles in Virginia. [dot-mfalse]PROBABLY [/dot-mfalse] Example: [Collected via e-mail and Facebook, November2015]Friend posted this. Seems fake. Just passing it along to be checked.   Beware sellers, 3 muslims tried to buy car from frederick dealer and one of them was identified as know ISIS member per FBI. They did not want to show any ID or do paper work for the car so please screen the people wanting to by your vehicles.   Origins: A series of coordinated terrorist attacks in Paris on 13 November 2015 understandably intensified extant concerns about the risk posed by ISIS; on 22November 2015, a Twitter user published an unsourced rumor pertaining to suspicious Middle Eastern men in the area of Frederick:HOLD UP pic.twitter.com/ISlJQ9jYVw   $B$ (@brookelyles_) November 23, 2015 The tweet contained a screenshot of a (presumably already circulating) text message. Its sender was identified only as "Gianella," and the text described a purported interaction at a car dealership. The rumor lacked a large number of key details such as the date of the incident, the city in which it occurred, and the name of the dealership in question. (The original tweet appeared to occur on 20 November 2015, and was subsequently deleted after screenshots circulated.) Absentbasic information about the claims aside, the rumor didn't make very much logical sense. According to the individual who sent the text, the three men oddly asserted that they wished to buy a vehicle "whether it passed inspection or not" (apparently unaware of the higher likelihood of such a transaction being private party). Without ostensible reason, the men then informed the dealership they planned only to use the vehicle for twodays  a tidbit of information that served only to raise possible red flags obstructing the purchase should the dealer opt not to engage in a sketchy, possibly illegallow-profit transaction. The unnamed dealership's manager then purportedly dialed 911 in earshot of the suspicious men (rather than surreptitiously), alerting them to the imminent arrival of police and causing them to flee. At this point, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) arrived and dusted for prints, the results of which appeared to be immediately available, with information disclosed to low-level car dealership employees for unclear reasons. Finally, the FBI opted to inform the car salespeople that the men were in fact likely on a small list of suspected ISIS operatives, despite there being no good reason for federal agents to do so (as it served only to compromise any investigation). The amount of time elapsed between the (still undated) visit and the FBI's disclosure of this information was also not included in the screenshot. Details in the text message weren't the only urban legend hallmarks attached to the tale. Just before the 22 November 2015 tweet went locally viral, the claim popped up at separate dealerships in the vicinity of Frederick and Gaithersburg, Virginia (tweets in the conversation cited the "friend of a friend" involved with the original rumor):@A_Roshayy @ForeverrMel I had these guys as my customers too. I was at one of the dealerships they went to.  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy @ListenToMyEyes @Errrunnn wait, your friend works in Frederick? This happened to me in Gaithersburg.   MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy wow that's unusual. I had spoken to the police about it. I made a copy of one of their drivers licenses. It was issued 2 wks ago  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy and didn't match their description at all....  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy I know ???? but this is actually scary. I didn't understand why they were looking for something so cheap. But they didn't look  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy related at all and seemed like they were on a hunt for a specifically cheap car, and it didn't really hit me til the police came  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy me neither... I don't know what to do or what to say. How are we supposed to protect ourselves at this point?  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy I don't think they've been found yet. I called the FBI but they said they couldn't tell me what's happening right now  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@ListenToMyEyes the same thing that happened in the screenshot she just posted. I didn't even know they went all they way up to frederick  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@mg11thirty he's my friend's friend but yeah she said he works in Fredrick! I guess they're traveling around..   Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 21, 2015 That conversation included screenshots of subsequent texts from "Gianella," who claimed that the men were spotted at a Subaru dealership in Frederick (she believed):@__CoachDave pic.twitter.com/qEofJ06bPI  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015The individual who sent the 20 November 2015 tweet later lamented a lack of action on the part of law enforcement before backpedaling to indicate she was unsure of the rumor's veracity; the user never explained why she deleted the original warning:@Marshy_Lillypad dude that's what I'm saying.. Like how come it hasn't been on the news why haven't they been arrested yet?   Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015@MindOfAPSYCHO_ from what I know it's true and a girl mentioned me saying it happened at her dealership in Gaithersburg, so it's happening????  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015@Meregod oh well I doubt someone would lie about it cause that's messed up but they're apparently not being cautious at all  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015 The rumors appeared to stem from social media-driven panics in the wake of the Paris attacks and were spread largely by Twitter users (not party to additional information) in Gaithersburg and Frederick. No one from any of the purportedly affected dealerships officially stepped forward to clarify the claims, nor did any of the rumors make logisticalsense from the perspective of a prospective terrorist. Surely, if the plot were rattled at the car dealership level, ISIS operatives would shift to a less-risky private transaction rather than continue flirting with capture. Moreover, there was no reason to suspect that if the FBI believed the men were truly wanted ISIS operatives they wouldn't take the threat seriously. Similarly, there's no reason that information about any related information would be released to the public unless an arrest had been made and a plot thwarted.Last updated: 30November 2015Originally published: 30November 2015 HOLD UP pic.twitter.com/ISlJQ9jYVw pic.twitter.com/ISlJQ9jYVw    $B$ (@brookelyles_) November 23, 2015 November 23, 2015  The tweet contained a screenshot of a (presumably already circulating) text message. Its sender was identified only as "Gianella," and the text described a purported interaction at a car dealership. The rumor lacked a large number of key details such as the date of the incident, the city in which it occurred, and the name of the dealership in question. (The original tweet appeared to occur on 20 November 2015, and was subsequently deleted after screenshots circulated.) Absentbasic information about the claims aside, the rumor didn't make very much logical sense. According to the individual who sent the text, the three men oddly asserted that they wished to buy a vehicle "whether it passed inspection or not" (apparently unaware of the higher likelihood of such a transaction being private party). Without ostensible reason, the men then informed the dealership they planned only to use the vehicle for twodays  a tidbit of information that served only to raise possible red flags obstructing the purchase should the dealer opt not to engage in a sketchy, possibly illegallow-profit transaction. The unnamed dealership's manager then purportedly dialed 911 in earshot of the suspicious men (rather than surreptitiously), alerting them to the imminent arrival of police and causing them to flee. At this point, the Federal Bureau of Investigation (FBI) arrived and dusted for prints, the results of which appeared to be immediately available, with information disclosed to low-level car dealership employees for unclear reasons. Finally, the FBI opted to inform the car salespeople that the men were in fact likely on a small list of suspected ISIS operatives, despite there being no good reason for federal agents to do so (as it served only to compromise any investigation). The amount of time elapsed between the (still undated) visit and the FBI's disclosure of this information was also not included in the screenshot. Details in the text message weren't the only urban legend hallmarks attached to the tale. Just before the 22 November 2015 tweet went locally viral, the claim popped up at separate dealerships in the vicinity of Frederick and Gaithersburg, Virginia (tweets in the conversation cited the "friend of a friend" involved with the original rumor): @A_Roshayy @ForeverrMel I had these guys as my customers too. I was at one of the dealerships they went to.  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy @ForeverrMel November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy @ListenToMyEyes @Errrunnn wait, your friend works in Frederick? This happened to me in Gaithersburg.   MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy wow that's unusual. I had spoken to the police about it. I made a copy of one of their drivers licenses. It was issued 2 wks ago  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy and didn't match their description at all....  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy I know ???? but this is actually scary. I didn't understand why they were looking for something so cheap. But they didn't look  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy related at all and seemed like they were on a hunt for a specifically cheap car, and it didn't really hit me til the police came  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy me neither... I don't know what to do or what to say. How are we supposed to protect ourselves at this point?  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@A_Roshayy I don't think they've been found yet. I called the FBI but they said they couldn't tell me what's happening right now  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@ListenToMyEyes the same thing that happened in the screenshot she just posted. I didn't even know they went all they way up to frederick  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015@mg11thirty he's my friend's friend but yeah she said he works in Fredrick! I guess they're traveling around..   Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 21, 2015 That conversation included screenshots of subsequent texts from "Gianella," who claimed that the men were spotted at a Subaru dealership in Frederick (she believed):@__CoachDave pic.twitter.com/qEofJ06bPI  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015The individual who sent the 20 November 2015 tweet later lamented a lack of action on the part of law enforcement before backpedaling to indicate she was unsure of the rumor's veracity; the user never explained why she deleted the original warning:@Marshy_Lillypad dude that's what I'm saying.. Like how come it hasn't been on the news why haven't they been arrested yet?   Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015@MindOfAPSYCHO_ from what I know it's true and a girl mentioned me saying it happened at her dealership in Gaithersburg, so it's happening????  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015@Meregod oh well I doubt someone would lie about it cause that's messed up but they're apparently not being cautious at all  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015 The rumors appeared to stem from social media-driven panics in the wake of the Paris attacks and were spread largely by Twitter users (not party to additional information) in Gaithersburg and Frederick. No one from any of the purportedly affected dealerships officially stepped forward to clarify the claims, nor did any of the rumors make logisticalsense from the perspective of a prospective terrorist. Surely, if the plot were rattled at the car dealership level, ISIS operatives would shift to a less-risky private transaction rather than continue flirting with capture. Moreover, there was no reason to suspect that if the FBI believed the men were truly wanted ISIS operatives they wouldn't take the threat seriously. Similarly, there's no reason that information about any related information would be released to the public unless an arrest had been made and a plot thwarted.Last updated: 30November 2015Originally published: 30November 2015 @A_Roshayy @ListenToMyEyes @Errrunnn wait, your friend works in Frederick? This happened to me in Gaithersburg. @A_Roshayy @ListenToMyEyes @Errrunnn    MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy wow that's unusual. I had spoken to the police about it. I made a copy of one of their drivers licenses. It was issued 2 wks ago  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy and didn't match their description at all....  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy I know ???? but this is actually scary. I didn't understand why they were looking for something so cheap. But they didn't look  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy November 21, 2015   @A_Roshayy related at all and seemed like they were on a hunt for a specifically cheap car, and it didn't really hit me til the police came  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy me neither... I don't know what to do or what to say. How are we supposed to protect ourselves at this point?  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy I don't think they've been found yet. I called the FBI but they said they couldn't tell me what's happening right now  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @A_Roshayy November 21, 2015 @ListenToMyEyes the same thing that happened in the screenshot she just posted. I didn't even know they went all they way up to frederick  MG (@mg11thirty) November 21, 2015 @ListenToMyEyes November 21, 2015 @mg11thirty he's my friend's friend but yeah she said he works in Fredrick! I guess they're traveling around..   Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 21, 2015 That conversation included screenshots of subsequent texts from "Gianella," who claimed that the men were spotted at a Subaru dealership in Frederick (she believed):@__CoachDave pic.twitter.com/qEofJ06bPI  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015The individual who sent the 20 November 2015 tweet later lamented a lack of action on the part of law enforcement before backpedaling to indicate she was unsure of the rumor's veracity; the user never explained why she deleted the original warning:@Marshy_Lillypad dude that's what I'm saying.. Like how come it hasn't been on the news why haven't they been arrested yet?   Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015@MindOfAPSYCHO_ from what I know it's true and a girl mentioned me saying it happened at her dealership in Gaithersburg, so it's happening????  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015@Meregod oh well I doubt someone would lie about it cause that's messed up but they're apparently not being cautious at all  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015 The rumors appeared to stem from social media-driven panics in the wake of the Paris attacks and were spread largely by Twitter users (not party to additional information) in Gaithersburg and Frederick. No one from any of the purportedly affected dealerships officially stepped forward to clarify the claims, nor did any of the rumors make logisticalsense from the perspective of a prospective terrorist. Surely, if the plot were rattled at the car dealership level, ISIS operatives would shift to a less-risky private transaction rather than continue flirting with capture. Moreover, there was no reason to suspect that if the FBI believed the men were truly wanted ISIS operatives they wouldn't take the threat seriously. Similarly, there's no reason that information about any related information would be released to the public unless an arrest had been made and a plot thwarted.Last updated: 30November 2015Originally published: 30November 2015 @mg11thirty he's my friend's friend but yeah she said he works in Fredrick! I guess they're traveling around.. @mg11thirty    Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 21, 2015 November 21, 2015  That conversation included screenshots of subsequent texts from "Gianella," who claimed that the men were spotted at a Subaru dealership in Frederick (she believed): @__CoachDave pic.twitter.com/qEofJ06bPI  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015 @__CoachDave pic.twitter.com/qEofJ06bPI November 24, 2015  The individual who sent the 20 November 2015 tweet later lamented a lack of action on the part of law enforcement before backpedaling to indicate she was unsure of the rumor's veracity; the user never explained why she deleted the original warning:@Marshy_Lillypad dude that's what I'm saying.. Like how come it hasn't been on the news why haven't they been arrested yet?   Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015@MindOfAPSYCHO_ from what I know it's true and a girl mentioned me saying it happened at her dealership in Gaithersburg, so it's happening????  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015@Meregod oh well I doubt someone would lie about it cause that's messed up but they're apparently not being cautious at all  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015 The rumors appeared to stem from social media-driven panics in the wake of the Paris attacks and were spread largely by Twitter users (not party to additional information) in Gaithersburg and Frederick. No one from any of the purportedly affected dealerships officially stepped forward to clarify the claims, nor did any of the rumors make logisticalsense from the perspective of a prospective terrorist. Surely, if the plot were rattled at the car dealership level, ISIS operatives would shift to a less-risky private transaction rather than continue flirting with capture. Moreover, there was no reason to suspect that if the FBI believed the men were truly wanted ISIS operatives they wouldn't take the threat seriously. Similarly, there's no reason that information about any related information would be released to the public unless an arrest had been made and a plot thwarted.Last updated: 30November 2015Originally published: 30November 2015 @Marshy_Lillypad dude that's what I'm saying.. Like how come it hasn't been on the news why haven't they been arrested yet? @Marshy_Lillypad    Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015 November 24, 2015 @MindOfAPSYCHO_ from what I know it's true and a girl mentioned me saying it happened at her dealership in Gaithersburg, so it's happening????  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015 @MindOfAPSYCHO_ November 24, 2015 @Meregod oh well I doubt someone would lie about it cause that's messed up but they're apparently not being cautious at all  Alex Roch (@A_Roshayy) November 24, 2015 @Meregod November 24, 2015   The rumors appeared to stem from social media-driven panics in the wake of the Paris attacks and were spread largely by Twitter users (not party to additional information) in Gaithersburg and Frederick. No one from any of the purportedly affected dealerships officially stepped forward to clarify the claims, nor did any of the rumors make logisticalsense from the perspective of a prospective terrorist. Surely, if the plot were rattled at the car dealership level, ISIS operatives would shift to a less-risky private transaction rather than continue flirting with capture. Moreover, there was no reason to suspect that if the FBI believed the men were truly wanted ISIS operatives they wouldn't take the threat seriously. Similarly, there's no reason that information about any related information would be released to the public unless an arrest had been made and a plot thwarted.   Last updated: 30November 2015 Originally published: 30November 2015 An entreaty to help save the life of a victimized child who had been raped by an AIDS-positive attacker began circulating as a cell phone text message in June 2010. At that time, the message being zinged from phone to phone represented the rapist being sought with a photograph of an African American male bearing gold teeth: This guy raped a five year old little girl. He ruined her life, she is alive & in the hospital can't move and can never have children, or a normal life. This guy goes by different names he is in hiding & has AIDS. The girl came out positive. Please help us catch this animal. Every time this message is fwd the Dell Hospital will donate $.15 to Maria's medication & treatment. Please don't hesitate to fwd this. It could've been you're daughter or sister. God bless. Thank you!. Forward this to as many people as possible. In October 2010, the hoax underwent a revival when it was circulated anew, that time accompanied by the photo of a Hispanic male sporting multiple tattoos. Since 2014, this Facebook post has been shared more than 77,000 times. A second post from 2016 has been shared more than 82,000 times with a different photograph: this Facebook post second post   There was no such child: the whole thing was a leg-pull, said Dell Children's Medical Center of Central Texas: said A false text message has been circulating that describes an incident involving a 5-year old girl. The message states that every time you forward it to someone, Dell Children's Medical Center will donate 15 cents to cover the child's healthcare expenses. This message is spam and is in no way affiliated with Dell Children's Medical Center or the Seton Family of Hospitals. If you receive this message, please delete it. As demonstrated so aptly by public efforts to provide relief to earthquake victims in Haiti, beneficences initiated by cell phone generally involve a tracking and billing mechanism that requires participants to text a specific short word or phrase to a particular (five-digit) number, not the willy-nilly forwarding of a explanatory narrative to as many people as possible. Haiti In 2009 we began to note that "Forward this message to help fund medical care for a sick or dying child" appeals were beginning to appear as cell phone text messages as well as being passed in e-mail. That trend continues into the present, with the "shot 14-year-old boy" just another iteration of the same basic hoax that falsely claims the American Cancer Society, the Make-A-Wish Foundation, or some other large entity will donate a predetermined amount of money every time a particular message is forwarded. Such leg-pulls have been circulating via e-mail since 1997. hoax Typically, a large charity is named as the benefactor standing ready to direct monies towards the costs of medical care for the languishing child, but various corporations have also been fingered for this role in other iterations of the hoax, such as AOL and ZDNet in the Rachel Arlington leg pull (brain cancer sufferer in need of an operation) and McDonald's and Pizza Hut in the Justin Mallory prank (epileptic in need of long-term care). Rachel Arlington Justin Mallory Everyone wants to help sick children get better, and the thought of a little boy or girl suffering from some dread disease or infirmity because people couldn't be bothered to forward a message tugs straight at the heartstrings. Problem is, hoaxsters know that, and they play upon these very human drives for their personal amusement. Once again, that is the case here: Well-intentioned forwarding does nothing towards helping a sick child; it does, however, make the day of some prankster. If you want to make a difference in a sick child's life, the best way is still the old-fashioned one: donate your money or your time, don't passively share a worthless message.   KEYE-TV [Austin].  "Text Messages About Dell Children's Med Center Donations Are False."
  22 June 2010. Roser, Mary Ann.  "Seton Alerts Public That Text Message to Help 'Raped' Child Is Bogus."
  The [Austin] Statesman.  22 June 2010. This story was updated on June 4, 2019 to add a second viral Facebook post. In the summer of 2020, readers asked us to examine widely shared Facebook posts that claimed the Kroger supermarket chain was refusing to give customers cash change, and thereby overcharging them.  One widely shared post from July 9 stated that: post "Kroger will no longer keep coins in the drawer. Starting tomorrow. We will take them, but we can't give change. You can round up to the nearest dollar and donate it to the food bank, or round up and it goes onto your Kroger card as a credit. So it begins ..."   One week later, Facebook users began sharing a post that purported to describe a contentious transaction and conversation at a Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois. The post claimed that, in light of a coin shortage, Kroger was rounding up the price of items to the next dollar, where a customer pays in cash, and then refusing to give out change, thus effectively overcharging customers: users began sharing post ... Stopped by Kroger today for just a gallon of milk. Seems due to this "Change Shortage", their new policy is to round every cash purchase UP to the next full dollar! I can even accept if they insisted on they could not "give" any coin back.It cost $2.41. I offered $2.50 payment. The clerk refused the quarters, explained "due to change shortage" policy & demanded another dollar instead. I offered the $2.50 again.Clerk: "Your total is $3.00."Me: The total is $2.41, which $2.50 adequately covers & I don't care to give up the 9 cent, but I do NOT accept being up charged 60 cent while you refuse to take the coins I am offering.Clerk: it's $3.00 So literally the clerk was insisting I pay the $3 or they were refusing the sale. WTF ?!?...   A nationwide coin shortage did take place in the summer of 2020, contrary to a prevalent conspiracy theory that falsely claimed the crisis was fabricated or manufactured in order to usher in a cashless economy as part of a broader push towards a "New World Order." That conspiracy theory reared its head in the Kroger post, which included the line, "This is how being FORCED into a Cashless economy begins!" did take place conspiracy theory Remarkably, it is not clear what Kroger's company policy was with regard to providing cash change to customers, at the time the Bourbonnais Facebook post was originally published, in the early hours of July 16.  Initially, a spokesperson for the company provided Snopes a statement which asserted that, in light of the ongoing nationwide coin shortage, Kroger was offering customers the option of receiving the amount of their change in the form of loyalty card credit or rounding up their total and donating the remainder to charity, as well as the existing options of paying by credit or debit card, or paying by cash and getting cash change. The statement read: "We remain committed to providing our customers with an uplifting shopping experience and the freedom and flexibility to choose their payment method, including cash, during this unprecedented time. The Federal Reserve is experiencing a significant coin shortage across the U.S., resulting from fewer coins being exchanged and spent during the COVID-19 pandemic. Like many retailers and businesses, we are adjusting to the temporary shortage in several ways while still accepting cash. "Customers can switch their payment type (e.g., use debit or credit vs. cash), and through our upgraded technology, we can now load coin change to their loyalty card for use during the next shopping trip, provide coin change at a lane with coins available or round up their order to support The Kroger Co. Zero Hunger | Zero Waste Foundation, a public charity committed to creating communities free of hunger and waste." [Emphasis is added.] However, after this fact check was first published, we became aware of contradictory public statements attributed to Kroger earlier in July. In a July 15 article, KABC-TV reported that Kroger had "announced this week that they will not be returning coin change to customers who pay with cash." The article attributed the following statement to the company: KABC-TV "Currently our stores are collecting donations... by allowing customers to round up their order total to the next dollar... For customers that choose not to donate, our cashiers will load the coin value due back through their loyalty card. Customers can redeem the amount on their next transaction. We know this is an inconvenience for our customers and we appreciate their patience." That statement made no mention of the continued possibility of customers receiving their coin change as coin change, an omission which naturally indicates that Kroger policy at that time was to not provide customers with coin change.  On July 10, a named company spokesperson appears to have told another news outlet that Kroger policy was to no longer give out coin change. WXIX reported that: "Kroger spokesperson Erin Rofles confirmed Friday the grocer will no longer return coin change to customers. Instead, the remainders from cash transactions will be applied to customers loyalty cards and automatically used on their next purchase." WXIX We asked Kroger to explain these glaring discrepancies in the company's various public articulations of its policy on coin change. A spokesperson said that the statement initially provided to Snopes (which asserted that company policy was to give customers the option of receiving coin change) was "first issued on July 13," suggesting the company had been consistent in its messaging on the subject. We found the same wording in a series of tweets the company sent to a customer on July 14. Nevertheless, the company also told KABC-TV the opposite in an article published the following day.  tweets In one particularly egregious example of the confusion surrounding Kroger's articulation of its policy, on July 14 the company actually posted two different sets of tweets in response to the same customer's inquiries on Twitter. In one pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that customers could either have their change loaded on to their loyalty card or donated to charity (no mention of coin change). In a second pair of tweets, Kroger told @bbaum17 that the company could accept a credit or debit card as payment, or load the customer's change on to their loyalty card, or have it donated to charity, or they could "provide coin change at a lane with coins available."  sets of tweets The company spokesperson suggested to Snopes that news articles reporting that Kroger was no longer giving out coin change might have been based on signs that have been erected inside Kroger supermarkets. The spokesperson provided the following example, which reads: ATTENTION CUSTOMERS:The Federal Reserve is currently experiencing a coin shortage. Please consider Rounding Up for Zero Hunger ZeroWaste, using exact change or another form of payment. We apologize for any inconvenience this maycause and appreciate your help.   A sign that apologizes to customers for the inconvenience associated with an ongoing nationwide coin shortage, suggests three ways to avoid the need to provide change, and omits to mention that customers can still get their change in coin form is very obviously likely to create the perception that Kroger no longer gives out coin change.  We asked Kroger for exact details on whether, when and how its policy on coin change had changed; as well as whether, when, and how those changes had been communicated to Kroger's regional divisions, in-store employees, and paying customers. We will update this fact check if we receive a response to those questions.  In its initial statement to Snopes, Kroger gave us the clear impression that its policy on coin change was unambiguous, made no mention of any existing confusion or misinformation over that policy, and made no mention whatsoever that the company and its spokespersons had previously made directly contradictory public statements about that policy.  In reality, Kroger and its spokespersons had indeed issued contradictory and confusing public statements, and had done so before the original "Bourbonnais" Facebook post was published in the early hours of July 16. As a result, we are changing the rating in this fact check from "false" to "Mixture." It's not entirely clear what took place at the Kroger supermarket in Bourbonnais, Illinois, specifically, but it appears to have been at least similar to the description in the widely shared Facebook post. A spokesperson for the company told Snopes:  "The associate who engaged with this customer was newly trained to the cashier role and misunderstood the various ways were adapting to the temporary national coin shortage. It is an isolated event, and weve since coached the associate and contacted the customer." This appears to be a tacit admission by the company that, in the specific instance highlighted in the Facebook post, the cashier did incorrectly insist on receiving $3 in cash for the milk, but that this was not in keeping with the company's policy, although as we outlined above, the company's public articulation of its policy on coin change has not been consistent. The image of a receipt that accompanied the viral Facebook post was dated July 15, and indicates that the customer in question paid $3 in cash for a $2.41 container of milk (after tax). A line in the receipt labelled "change shortage" had $0.59 next to it, and the "change" line had 0.00 next to it. That indicates that the customer did not receive cash change.  Shortly after midnight on July 16, a person who lives near Bourbonnais, whose name we are withholding because their original Facebook post was private, published what appears to be the original version of the subsequently widely shared post. (That original version of the post began "Stopped by Kroger today" while versions published later began "Stopped by Kroger yesterday," and the edit history of the post shows that a photograph of the receipt that showed the name of the cashier was replaced with a photograph showing the cashier's name obscured -- both signs that the post was published by the customer in question).  We contacted that person, whose identity we verified. In an email to Snopes, that person reiterated the version of events presented in the original Facebook post. The customer clarified that it was not possible to purchase the milk with a debit or credit card because the patron lives on "a cash basis." To complicate matters further, on July 22 a Facebook page with the name "KROGER-Bourbonnais" published responses to the viral post, explaining that the company was "currently allocating the remaining change that you would typically receive after your purchase to your Kroger Loyalty Card," but later wrote that "we are not rounding up ... it was just a mistake of [sic] a cashier." explaining later Those posts were not written by an authentic Kroger company account, a spokesperson told Snopes, adding "Our social media team isnt affiliated with it." Mac Guill, Dan. "Did a Nationwide US Coin Shortage Occur in Summer 2020?"
  Snopes.com.  8 July 2020. Grider, Geoffrey.  "Remember the Psy-Op Called the Great Toilet Paper Shortage? Now We Are Pretending There's a National Coin Shortage ..."
  NowTheEndBegins.com.  11 July 2020. Updated [23 July 2020]: Rating changed from "false" to "Mixture." Article substantially updated to include Kroger's previous, contradictory public articulations of its policy on coin change. The conservative group Turning Point USA created a meme that pushes a sophomoric and factually lacking political argument. The meme in question, watermarked with the logo of Turning Point USA's political action committee (Turning Point Action), makes two claims. First, it states that the year 2019 was the first year the United States achieved energy independence since 1957. Second, it argues that "in only ten days" Joe Biden "sent us back 50 years," implying policies enacted in the first 10 days of his administration reversed American energy independence: political action committee   Turning Point Action's graphic, it bears highlighting, makes no reference to the year 2020, despite the fact that President Donald Trump was in office that year. The claim about 2019 being the first year in which the U.S. achieved energy independence since 1957 is true  so long as we understand what the term "energy independence" really means. It means that the U.S. produced more energy than it consumed. Most importantly, from an energy security perspective, energy independence does not mean that the U.S. doesn't import foreign oil or isn't fundamentally reliant on foreign sources of energy. is true In 2019, according to data from the U.S. Energy Information Administration (EIA), the U.S. imported 9.1 million barrels per day (MMb/d) of oil from about 90 countries, though at the same time it also exported 8.5 MMb/d of oil to about 190 countries. By email, Zeke Hausfather, a climate scientist and energy systems analyst at the Breakthrough Institute, explained that "our local production does not meaningfully insulate us from potential future global oil price shocks."  according Zeke Hausfather The energy independence experienced by the U.S. in 2019 was driven by record levels of total fossil fuel exports from the U.S. That record was set as part of a long-term trend dating back to 2006 and 2008, according to the EIA: according Domestic crude oil production has increased since 2008 and natural gas production has increased since 2006. The increases in crude oil production and the easing of restrictions on crude oil exports in December 2015 have contributed to increases in crude oil exports. Increases in natural gas production along with increases in liquefied natural gas (LNG) export capacity have contributed to increases in natural gas exports in recent years. In 2011, the United States became a net exporter of petroleum products for the first time since at least 1949. In 2017, the United States became a net exporter of natural gas for the first time since the late 1950s. In 2019, U.S. total annual energy exports exceeded total annual energy imports for the first time in 67 years, and the United States became a net total energy exporter.   The Turning Point meme disregards entirely the existence of the year 2020. The omission of 2020 masks not only a decline in U.S. fossil fuel production that occurred, it also conceals a larger truth about U.S. presidents and the global energy market: Neither they nor their policies have a significant effect on the market compared to other global factors. a decline A significant factor in allowing the U.S. to increase its energy exports has been the rising cost of crude oil globally. Technological innovations like fracking and horizontal drilling have, in recent years, allowed the U.S. to exploit fossil fuel reserves that were previously inaccessible, but these technologies add cost. A high-cost, high-demand energy economy  like the one present during the record-setting year of 2019  benefits the U.S. energy sector because it makes American fossil fuel exports financially viable. The flip side is that the viability of U.S. exports depends in large measure on the going rate for a barrel of oil. If the cost is too low, U.S. drilling operations become financially uncompetitive and exports drop off. The year 2020 saw a historic drop in the price of oil. add cost historic drop "In 2020, U.S. oil production fell by around 8% relative to 2019," Hausfather told Snopes. "This was primarily due to falling global oil prices making relatively high-cost US shale oil production uncompetitive." The drop in demand, and then price, was not the result of any policy decision; it was the result of a massive global pandemic. In a Feb. 3, 2021, news release, Acting EIA Director Stephen Nalley explained that 'the pandemic triggered an historic energy demand shock that led to ... decreases in energy production, and sometimes volatile commodity prices in 2020.'" news release Indeed, this volatility resulted in times during 2020  a year in which Joe Biden was not president  when the U.S. dipped into consuming more energy that it produced. In July and August 2020, the U.S. was not energy independent, at least on monthly terms. By Turning Point USA's logic, this would mean that two months of Trump "sent us back 50 years" in terms of energy policy. In reality, the actions of any U.S. president cannot affect rapid change in the global energy market, and the effect of any domestic policy changes are dwarfed by global factors outside any one president's control. July and August As previously discussed, the U.S. had already experienced at least a brief period of energy "dependence" before Biden took office. While the most recent month for which we have data  October 2020  indicates the U.S. was producing slightly more energy than it consumed toward the end of Trump's presidency, U.S. oil production has been dropping off and global demand remains depressed. These trends, which predate the Biden administration, are unlikely to change anytime soon. October 2020 It will take a while for the energy sector to get to its new normal, said the EIA's Nalley in February 2021. In its 2021 "Global Outlooks" annual report, the EIA argued that "total U.S. energy consumption will return to 2019 levels by 2029, though that is highly dependent on the pace of U.S. economic recovery." In terms of energy production, "EIA projects that the United States will continue to export more petroleum and other liquids than it imports, but the balance of imports to exports will be highly sensitive to supply, demand, and price factors." said argued The bottom line, according to the Breakthrough Institutes' Hausfather, is that "oil production changes in 2020 and 2021 are driven by larger changes in global demand and oil prices, rather than anything that either the Trump or Biden administration has done." Because the meme correctly states that 2019 was the first year the U.S. achieved energy independence in decades, but because it falsely implies a connection between the Biden administration and post-2019 trends in the global energy market that predate his time in office and are independent of the actions of either Trump or Biden, we rank its claims "false."