2 Million Bikers to DC
In February 2013, the American Muslim Political Action Committee (AMPAC) announced they would be staging an event called the "Million Muslim March," which they hoped would gather one million people in Washington, D.C., on 11 September 2013, the twelfth anniversary of the 9/11 terrorist attacks, to press the U.S. government into revealing "the truth" about those attacks: AMPAC The American Muslim Political Action Committee is hosting what it hopes will be a gathering of one million people in Washington, D.C., on the 12th anniversary of 9/11 to urge the government to reveal "the truth" about the attacks."We want to hold President Obama accountable for his empty promises of creating a transparent government," march organizer Isa Hodge said. "What exactly have we spent all our money, lost lives and taken lives for? The entire record of the 9/11 Commission has never been released." Protesters will also denounce "FBI traps," "illegal tapping and surveilling of Muslim Americans" and "media propaganda making the word terrorist synonymous with Muslim," he said. After negative public reaction, AMPAC changed the name of their event to the "Million American March Against Fear" (MAMAF), which they describe as offering the following events: We invite you to stand with and join us to Rally Against Fear at 12 noon on The National Mall, then the Congress, the Supreme Court, and the White House, to hold truth to power at the three major branches of American government.We ask all individuals and organizations working for peace to attend this collective action to tell our Government leaders we want transparency and policies of peace. In the past 12 years since 9/11 the United States government as failed to protect and promote Constitutional liberties and human life, here and abroad. We feel that accountability in government has been ignored and the time has arrived to collectively speak truth to power. Speaking will be experts and individuals on the lack of transparency and questions plaguing 9/11, steady erosion of domestic civil liberties, drone policy and the very dire effect of these on of plight of American Muslims here at home, and Muslim communities globally in the scope of U.S. imperialism, and the modern face of resistance to unmanned aerial surveillance and warfare. In August 2013, motorcyclists began organizing a "2 Million Bikers to DC counter-event, which they hoped would bring even larger numbers of bikers on a Washington ride-through to "pay tribute and offer respect to those that lost their lives on that day 12 years ago, and to salute our troops engaged in the War on Terror": 2 Million Bikers to DC Example:  [Collected via Facebook, September 2013] I keep seeing posts on Face Book saying that President Obama denied bikers a permit to ride in Washington, D.C. on 9/11 but did allowMuslims the same privilege. True or false? However, the National Park Service (NPS) has jurisdiction over the issue, and the NPS has declined to issue the group a "no stop" permit that would facilitate their ride through Washington by granting them a police escort and a waiver for red lights, stop signs and other traffic signals. The NPS cited traffic issues and manpower requirements in denying the request: The National Park Services confirms that it has denied the permit for the ride-only, non-stop event after looking at it in terms of disruption and resource management.NPS spokeswoman Carol Johnson said the group's permit application was examined like all others, using the Code of Federal Regulations. Johnson said the group had asked to ride through what's called Memorial Core, near the Memorial Bridge, from 9 a.m. to 4 p.m. with 2,000 motorcyclists. NPS decided that the large ride would require closures of important roadways, block access to Rock Creek and George Washington Parkways and would cause a severe disruption to traffic. A police escort would also be needed. "It's just a case of what they asked for in the permit applications," Johnson said. The Metropolitan Police Department [said] the group was asked to move its ride to a weekend, when it would be less disruptive to traffic. "Solely to facilitate the speed and timeliness of the participants in itself does not fall within the definition of a First Amendment assembly, said police spokeswoman Gwendolyn Crump. The permits in question were under the purview of the NPS and the Metropolitan Police Department, not President Obama himself. The lack of a permit did not prevent bikers from riding through Washington on the 9/11 anniversary; the riders just weren't exempt from traffic laws and therefore couldn't navigate through the city nearly as quickly as they could have if they had been issued a "no-stop" permit. The two cases were dissimilar in that AMPAC requested a permit for a smaller gathering in a fixed location and submitted their request several months in advance; the 2 Million Bikers group requested a no-stop permit for a much larger group involving miles of roadways, street closures, and police escorts, and they didn't submit their request for a no-stop permit until a few weeks before the event, as documented by this 30 August 2013 Facebook post: Neither group came anywhere close to the "millions" of participants referenced in their event names: the Million American March Against Fear was said to have drawn between a few dozen and a few hundred people, while news accounts cited estimates for the 2 Million Bikers to DC event at somewhere between 10,000 and 75,000 participants. 10,000 75,000 Many Internet postings later claimed that Washington police had estimated the 2 Million Bikers event turnout at between 800,000 and 1.2 million participants, but we have found no documentation (other than repetition of rumor) confirming that local police made any such estimate, and when we queried the Washington Metropolitan Police Department (MPD) about the issue, the Director of the MPD's Office of Communications confirmed that "the Metropolitan Police Department does not provide crowd estimates."   Brenzing, Bob.  "10,000 Bikers Circle Washington for 9/11."
  WUSA-TV [Washington].  12 September 2013.   Davidson, Jacob.  "2 Million Bikers to DC: Motorcycle Riders Roll into Washington."
  Time.  11 September 2013.   Lee, Caroline.  "'Million Muslim March' 2013 Has Low Turnout, Lost in Sea of Motorcyclists."
  UPI.  11 September 2013.   Somers, Meredith.  "Bikers, Muslims Pledge Return to D.C. Next 9/11."
  The Washington Times.  11 September 2013.
Facebook, Twitter, Google Images, and websites that collect famous quotes are full of posts and memes that claim TV icon Oprah Winfrey once said the words, "When people treat you like they don't care, believe them." The question was whether or not there was evidence that she said the words.  We looked back several years and found that the quote appeared to have first been shared by a handful of Facebook and Twitter users in July and August 2013. At that time, Winfrey's name was not attached to it. For example, this tweet was the oldest posting we could find of the words: July August Winfrey tweet  When we searched Twitter for a timeline of the quote's appearances there, it looked like it wasn't until August 2014 when Winfrey's name first appeared with it. This indicated that the saying was perhaps misattributed to her. Twitter first appeared  The saying was later tweeted by former professional fighter Gary Goodridge in April 2022, without any mention of Winfrey: tweeted  To continue our research, we performed a special search on Twitter. We searched for tweets that contained the quote and filtered the results to only show messages with more than 250 likes. That search returned 15 results. None of the 15 popular tweets showed Winfrey's name next to the quote. Several of the tweets credited the saying to "Anonymous." returned 15 results We also saw several Facebook posts on pages that collect inspirational sayings. Those posts credited the quote to "Hina," "Kate," "OmI," "Bella," "ADMIN 2," "Uzi," "ShahID," and several other names we did not recognize. No evidence we found showed that the quote originally came from any specific noteworthy person, let alone Winfrey. Facebook credited Days after we published this story, we received a tweet from a reader that included a video from 1997. In that video, Winfrey is talking to American author, poet, and civil rights activist Maya Angelou, telling her of the time that she taught her what she saw to be a valuable lesson. Winfrey told Angelou that she remembered her saying the phrase, "When people show you who they are, believe them." This was similar but slightly different than the quote in the meme. video Maya Angelou  Winfrey recounted the story of Angelou telling her the phrase like this: When she first told me this story, I was talking about some bad relationship or relationship gone bad, because of my own choices. And she was saying to me, "Why are you blaming the other person? He showed you who he was. He told you who he was." And, when you look back on bad relationships, like for myself, sitting in a window waiting on him to show up, not even answering the phone. This is before we had cellphones. Not even getting on the phone, because I was afraid if it was busy for one second that he would call and I would miss the call. Not taking out the garbage on the weekends, because I might be out taking the garbage out the moment that he called. Not running the bath water, because he might call while I'm running the bath water, and I might miss the phone. And waiting and waiting and waiting and waiting. When you look at that process of waiting on somebody who has told you they were going to do something and told you they were going to be there for you and they were not, they are showing you in that moment exactly who they are. That means that's somebody who cannot be trusted. So why would you the next time trust that person? So, Maya Angelou said to me, when I was telling her one of these stories about, "I'm waiting and I couldn't believe it and he didn't call me and I don't know what happened," she was saying, "My dear," in her Maya voice, "My dear, when people show you who they are, why don't you believe them? Why must you be shown 29 times before you can see who they really are? Why can't you get it the first time?" And so the adjunct of that is, when people show you who they are, believe them the first time. Don't wait for the twenty-ninth time." In sum, Winfrey did once say a phrase somewhat similar to the words in the meme. However, if we were to give credit for the saying to anyone, that credit would go to Angelou. During a June 6, 2010, appearance on ABC'sThis Week, Sen. John Kerry -- who is sponsoring a comprehensive energy bill -- discussed the nation's energy future against the backdrop of the ongoing oil spill in the Gulf of Mexico.During an interview with host Jake Tapper, Kerry said, Here's what's important -- not to be throwing the blame around, but to put America on the course to true energy independence and self-reliance and to begin to wean ourselves from our addiction to oil. ... The United States is losing a major economic transformational moment. Until we begin to do something -- you know, since 9/11, we now actually import more oil than we did before 9/11. It's insulting to common sense.We decided to check whether Kerry was correct about whether the United States imports more oil today than it did before the terrorist attacks of Sept. 11, 2001.The answer is complicated, because there are at least three possible ways to measure it.The number of barrels of crude oil imported. The U.S. imported 3.32 billion barrels of crude oil in 2000 and 3.40 billion barrels in 2001. Both figures were higher than the number imported in 2009 -- 3.31 billion barrels.By this measure, Kerry is incorrect, although just slightly. Imported crude oil compared to domestic production. We wondered whether imported crude oil was still increasing as a percentage of all oil in the U.S., even as it dropped in absolute amounts. In fact, that's exactly what happened.In 2000, oil imports accounted for 61 percent of the total of imports and domestic production, and in 2001, imports accounted for 62 percent. In 2009, the percentage of imports was 63 percent -- slightly higher than it was in either of those years. The underlying cause was that domestic oil production declined between the start of the decade and the end.By this measure, Kerry is correct, though once again, the difference is modest.Imported crude oil plus imported unfinished oils. William Brown, who analyzes energy data for the federal government's Energy Information Administration, told PolitiFact that in recent years, there's been a rise in imports of unfinished oils, which are partially refined, taking the place of pure crude oil imports. So he sent us data that combined those two sets of imports.In 2000, the combination of crude oil and unfinished oils accounted for 9.54 million barrels per day, and in 2001, they accounted for 9.71 million barrels per day. In 2009, that figure was 9.86 million barrels per day.Adding in unfinished oils to the previous measure of crude oil turns an incorrect statement into a correct one.Bottom line: There are three ways to analyze the question, and with two of them, Kerry is right that imports have grown. Using the other statistic, he's wrong -- imports have declined. So we rate Kerry's statement Mostly True. Freshman Oregon Sen. Tim Knopp, R-Bend, is clear that lawmakers need to fix the Public Employees Retirement System this year, and that they themselves should not be part of the system. He pledged during his campaign to decline membership in PERS.Earlier this month, Knopps officeissued a press release sayingthat along with being sworn into office, he upheld a campaign promise not to join the state retirement program known as the Public Employees Retirement System (PERS).It is very important to me to honor the promises that Ive made, Knopp is quoted as saying in the release. If wedont fix PERS now there will be fewer firefighters protecting our communities, fewer police officers on the streets, and fewer teachersin the classroom.PERS is contentious.Lawmakers reformed the system in 2003, curbing benefits for new employees going forward. Some lawmakers say its still too generous. Public employee unions are firm that the benefits were bargained for and are fair.Gov. John Kitzhaber, a Democrat, wants to find savings in the system, as do Republicans;House Speaker Tina Kotek, D-Portland, is lukewarm to the idea. Public employees generally favor Democrats with campaign help and money, so its not surprising to hear that Knopp, a Republican, promised to opt out.But PolitiFact Oregon also recalled that before he joined the Senate this year, Knopp was a three-term member of the Oregon House. In fact, he was House majority leader when lawmakers tackled reform in 2003. We were pretty sure he had been a member of PERS.Knopps office confirmed what we thought to be true. He joined the system in 1999, when he was first elected to the House, and remained an active member until 2005, when he left office. As a member for six years, he was vested in the system. The money continued accruing until 2010.What happened in 2010? Knopp needed money for a family medical emergency, so he cashed out his account. The total gross amount was $8,167.07, which we acknowledge is not an astonishingly high figure. Retirement benefits are calculated based on pay, and length of service, and legislators dont earn much, about $20,000 a year.Still, we think his previous membership is a relevant detail curiously missing from an otherwise glowing press release. If PolitiFact Oregon were in office and had made public employee retirement a major part of our platform and had promised to opt out, we think wed make it explicit that we had once been part of PERS, in the interest of full and complete disclosure.In any case, Knopp had three options when he was sworn into office this year: Join the Oregon Public Service Retirement Plan, which is the pension system hes complaining about; join the Oregon Savings Growth Plan, which is like any other deferred compensation plan; or decline to join a retirement plan.Knopp chose the deferred compensation plan. The state -- his employer, the taxpayers -- contributes 6 percent to his plan. The state does not pick up the additional 6 percent of salary on behalf of employees, as it would under PERS.We had two questions for the senator from Central Oregon: One, why not publicize the fact that he was a member -- for more than a decade -- of the system he is now criticizing? And two, why take a retirement option at all?Lets take the retirement question first. Knopp told PolitiFact Oregon that hes not opposed to compensation for legislators. He just doesnt want them to vote on a system in which they have a stake. To that end, he has co-sponsored a bill toprohibit future legislators from joining PERS or the deferred compensation plan, because they shouldnt be forced to be in the system, as he was.Actual or perceived, there needs to be somebody who completely represents citizens and taxpayers, without a conflict, he said.As to the first question, Knopp said he disclosed his previous membership on the campaign trail. When his Democratic challenger said Knopp was a PERS member at an October 2012 candidates forum, he said, I closed my account years ago, honestly, to pay some medical bills when my daughter had two brain surgeries.We get that the retirement system in 1999 was not the legislative issue that it was in 2003 or that it is in 2013. But why didnt he close his account before 2003, when it was clear hed have to vote on PERS reforms? He said it wasnt clear at the time whether he could..Why not close the account in 2005, after leaving office? He saidhe co-sponsored a bill in 2003 that offered a financial incentive for peoplewith inactive accounts to close their accounts. He thought it unseemly to benefit from that legislation -- although we checked, and he wouldnt have qualified.Then why wait until 2010 to close his account? Knopp didnt have a clear answer. He acknowledges that had he not needed the money in 2010, he would have continued to be a member.Knopp has been a consistent and outspoken critic of the Public Employees Retirement System. He served as the House chairman of the committee to reform PERS in 2003. He promised voters that he would not accept PERS this year and he followed through on the promise.What Knopp failed to mention is that he was a member of PERS who closed his account in 2010 because his family needed the money. Knopp could have closed his account in 2003 -- and avoided the conflict then -- or he could have closed his account when he left office in 2005.None of that takes away from the accuracy of the statement -- he honored his pledge to stay out of PERS -- but it is additional information that we deem missing from his press releases.We rate the statement Mostly True. In February 2020, a variation of a familiar scam circulated on Facebook. The dubious website airalaskaoffer.com offered users a "chance to get 2 free tickets of Alaska Air." To enter, users had to complete survey questions.   Alaska Airlines was quick to call out the scam on its Facebook page, offering advice on how to spot real offers: call out advice  As if the poor writing on the bogus offer weren't enough of a red flag, we've seen numerous scams like this one before. Save the company name, it was practically a carbon copy of previous anniversary scams. As we previously reported: this one before These web pages (which are not operated or sponsored by the companies they reference) typically ask the unwary to click what appear to be Facebook share buttons and post comments to the scammers site (which is really a ruse to dupe users into spreading the scam by sharing it with all of their Facebook friends). Those who follow such instructions are then led into a set of pages prompting them to input a fair amount of personal information (including name, age, address, and phone numbers), complete a lengthy series of surveys, and finally sign up (and commit to paying) for at least two Reward Offers (e.g., Netflix subscriptions, credit report monitoring services, prepaid credit cards). When the Bureau of Labor Statistics issued its latest job numbers, the Jan. 8, 2021, release brought a jaw-dropping number to light  from November to December the U.S. economy lost 140,000 jobs. Then came another jaw-dropper: As a group, only women lost jobs. Then came this claim, from Wisconsin Treasurer Sarah Godlewski. On Jan. 9, 2021, she tweeted a link to a CNN article about the job losses among women with this comment: This headline is hiding something from you. It wasnt all women that lost jobs, it was mostly Black and Latina women. In fact, white women gained employment. Any response we have to this pandemic and economy has to also address structural inequality. Did Black and Latina women carry the brunt of job loss nationally, while white women gained employment? When asked for a source, Godlewskis office pointed tothe CNN article, dated Jan. 8, that she retweeted. That article noted the U.S. economy lost 140,000 jobs overall, with women losing 156,000 jobs, while men gained 16,000 jobs. Her office also pointed to this paragraph in the article: Black and Latina women disproportionately work in some of the hardest-hit sectors in the pandemic, often in roles thatlack paid sick leaveand the ability to work from home. As schools and day cares closed, many were forced to make hard trade-offs between work and parenting. Those sectors are less likely to have flexibility, so when employers are inflexible or women can't come to work because of caregiving responsibilities  they have to exit the workforce, said Nicole C. Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Womens Policy Research. We did our own check of the BLS numbers, and the preliminary November and December numbers reflect what was in the CNN article. But Godlewskis claim was specifically on the difference in outcomes for Black and Latina women, as groups, when compared to white women. The BLS conducted a separate survey known as the Current Population Survey, which  measures employment for Black, Hispanic or Latina, and white women ages 20 and older. This data was part of the Jan. 8 release of the December jobs numbers. Participating households respond to the survey in the week of Dec. 6. That data, which is not seasonally adjusted, indicates the number of employed Black women decreased by 82,000 from November to December, and the number of Hispanic or Latina women employed decreased by 31,000. Meanwhile, the number of employed white women increased by 106,000 in the same time span. The overall number of women in the labor force has been fluctuating since the March-to-April numbers, which marked the first full hit of the pandemic. There was a decrease from July to September. Laura Dresser, an economist with the Center on Wisconsin Strategy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said prior economic declines were led by male-dominated fields, such as construction and manufacturing. The pandemic-driven decline, she said, has strongly affected areas  such as the restaurant and education industries  with a high number of women workers. And those jobs are low-wage jobs, Dresser said. They're held disproportionately by women. They're held disproportionately by people of color. With a link to a news article, Godlewski claimed: It wasnt all women that lost jobs, it was mostly Black and Latina women. In fact, white women gained employment. Federal statistics show that, as a group, women accounted for all of the job loss from November to December. Whats more, the number of employed white women increased during that time frame, while the numbers for Black and Hispanic or Latina women fell. We rate this claim True. In a debate that featured rehashed candidate positions, one new policy emerged: Sen. John McCains proposal to have the government buy and renegotiate what his top adviser later said would be literally millions of mortgages on houses whose values have dropped and whose owners are struggling to keep up with payments. Taxpayers would cover the difference between the original loan and the new one, at a cost the McCain campaign estimated to be at $300-billion. Is it expensive? Yes, McCain said during the debate on Oct. 7, 2008. But we all know, my friends, until we stabilize home values in America, were never going to start turning around and creating jobs and fixing our economy. And weve got to give some trust and confidence back to America. In announcing the plan amid the question-and-answer of a town hall meeting, McCain sought to make clear that this was a bold, new idea all his own: And its my proposal, its not Sen. Obamas proposal, its not President Bushs proposal. The question is whether or not McCain's proposal is as original as he claims. But first, some details on the plan. Mechanically, the initiative is very simple, said Doug Holtz-Eakin, senior policy adviser for the McCain campaign. A homeowner would initiate the process by calling a mortgage broker or other originator and basically saying, 'Id like to refinance my home, and they would start the underwriting process, verify incomes. The government loans would be available to mortgage holders who:  Live in the home as a primary residence. Can prove their creditworthiness (and made a down payment at the time of the purchase). The FHA would then issue a 30-year fixed rate mortgage at a rate Holtz-Eakin estimated would be in the low 5 percent range. Mortgage rates for 30-year fixed home loans are currently about 5.82 percent. Taxpayers would pick up the difference between the value of the two loans. While at least part of the expense of McCains plan would be borne by the recently approved $700-billion bailout plan, the initiative also would tap some of the $300-billion tied to the Housing and Economic Recovery Act passed this summer. Thats a plan that seeks to refinance loans for low- to moderate-income homeowners struggling to pay for homes they bought for more than they are now worth.The McCain plan outlines a dramatic shift in emphasis for the $700-billion bailout plan. While the bailout contained provisions to allow the Treasury to purchase mortgages directly, the legislation primarily was intended as a means for the government to buy troubled assets from financial institutions that might otherwise fail and that could later be sold when the markets recover. The hope, said Holtz-Eakin, is that McCains bottom level up plan will offset the need for some of that $700-billion. When McCain announced the plan at the debate, Obama supporters were quick to note that Obama had in previous weeks recommended that the bailout plan include the option of buying individual mortgages. We cant simply bail out Wall Street without helping the millions of innocent homeowners who are facing foreclosure  or, for that matter, are seeing their home values decline, Obama said. McCain argued, during the debate and afterward, that his proposal is nothing like what Obama talked about. And after hearing details the next day, the Obama campaign agreed with McCain. Obama has always supported plans to have the government buy loans at market prices (in other words, the loan companies would have to swallow some loss), said Obama campaign economic policy director Jason Furman. And homeowners would have to share some of the profits should the value of the home rise. But McCain's proposal wouldn't do either of those things. The government would refinance homes at their new, lower value and absorb the loss in propoerty values entirely. Okay, so who's idea is it? Charlie Black, a senior adviser to McCain, told theNew York Timesthe mortgage renewal idea actually originated with Sen. Hillary Rodham Clinton, who borrowed it from a Depression-era New Deal agency, the Home Owners Loan Corp. Clinton spoke about her plan before Congress on Sept. 18, 2008. A new government entity like the HOLC with a focus on attacking the source of the problem can serve the purpose of clearing a lot of those toxic mortgage securities from the market, Clinton said. We know there will not be any semblance of a normal or orderly marketplace until we have found a way to resolve these mortgage securities that are metastasizing in the bottom of our markets. By taking this paper out of the market and quarantining it in this new entity we will be able to give the market breathing room to recover. We will also be able to set the stage for an orderly sale of these securities and in turn allow some of them to recover and actually regain some of their value. Perhaps just as importantly, not only would our financial markets stabilize but so would our housing markets. Although Clinton did not offer specifics of her plan, she seemed to suggest that it would entail buying mortgages at discounted current market rates, and that taxpayers might ultimately turn a profit on them. That's not McCain's plan. So here's where we stand: It's true that terms of the $700-billion bailout plan first initiated by President Bush contains authority for the Treasury to purchase mortgages directly. And it's true that Obama has called for a component of the buyout plan to include direct purchase of mortgages to alleviate homeowners struggling to make payments. Finally, it's true that Clinton sketched out a plan last spring that shared some of the goals and traits of McCain's proposal. The method McCain proposes  buying mortgages at their original value and renegotiating at the current market value (with taxpayers picking up the difference)  is indeed new. But while McCain can rightly take credit for the details of his proposal, he is by no means alone with the idea of having the federal government buy mortgages directly. We rate his statement Mostly True. A Once in a Lifetime Photo of a forest fire in Bitterroot Forest/Montana This awsome picture was taken in the Bitterroot National Forest in Montana on August 6, 2000 by a fire behavior analyst from Fairbanks, Alaska by the name of John McColgan with a Digital camera. Since he was working while he took the picture, he cannot sell or profit from it so he should at least be recognized as the photographer of this once in a lifetime shot.  The year 2000 brought one of the worst fire seasons in half a century to the United States. By the month of August, more than 4 million acres (an area greater in size than the states of Connecticut and Rhode Island combined) had been burned by wildfires, and dozens of blazes raged out of control in eleven western states, with nearly half of the conflagrations occurring in Idaho and Montana. On 6 August 2000, as several fires converged in the Bitterroot National Forest near the town of Sula in western Montana, John McColgan, a fire behavior analyst in the employ of the USDA Forest Service, snapped the spectacular photograph shown above with a digital camera and described the experience to a writer for the western Montana newspaper The Missoulian: Bitterroot Forest Service "That's a once-in-a-lifetime look there. I just happened to be in the right place at the right time. I've been doing this for 20 years and it ranks in the top three days of fire behavior I've seen." The day was Aug. 6, the Sunday when several forest fires converged near Sula into a firestorm that overran 100,000 acres and destroyed 10 homes. Temperatures in the flame front were estimated at more than 800 degrees. Nevertheless, McColgan said, the wildlife appeared to be taking the crisis in stride, gathering near the East Fork of the Bitterroot River where it crosses under U.S. Highway 93. "They know where to go, where their safe zones are," McColgan said. "A lot of wildlife did get driven down there to the river. There were some bighorn sheep there. A small deer was standing right underneath me, under the bridge." McColgan snapped the photo with a Kodak DC280 digital camera. Since he was working as a Forest Service firefighter, the shot is public property and cannot be sold or used for commercial purposes. After McColgan downloaded his amazing image to an office computer, a friend found it, e-mailed a copy to another friend, and by mid-September 2000 the picture was blazing its way across the Internet. Because many forwarded copies of the image lacked any attribution or explanation, e-mail recipients began to circulate rumors about its origins and authenticity  some claimed that the photo was snapped by a tourist, that it was taken during the extensive Yellowstone National Park fire of 1988, or that it was yet another digital fake. fire As John McColgan said afterwards, "I couldn't have profited from [the photograph], so I guess I'm glad so many people are enjoying it." We're happy to help him at least receive proper credit for his work. This picture has also been circulated with text identifying it as a photograph of August 2003 forest fires in British Columbia, of October 2007 California wildfires, of the June 2012 Waldo Canyon Fire in Colorado Springs, Colorado, and the November 2016 forest fires in Gatlinburg, Tennessee. Chaney, Rob.  "Mystery Solved: Forest Service Firefighter Captured Tragedy with Digital Camera."
  The Missoulian.  15 September 2000. CNN.com.  "Montana Homes Threatened by Wildfires."
  7 August 2000. 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 On Oct. 2, 2020, shortly after news broke that U.S. President Donald Trump had tested positive for COVID-19, an image supposedly showing an email from his presidential campaign asking supporters to donate to Trump's recovery started going viral on social media: This email did not originate with the Trump campaign.   Snopes' staff members who subscribe to the Trump team's campaign emails did not receive this request. The @TrumpEmail Twitter account, which monitors political emails from the Trump team, also reported that this email did not originate with the president's campaign:  In addition to the fact that this email did not land in our inbox, the message also makes a somewhat suspicious request for a very precise monetary figure: $421 million. This is the same amount, according to The New York Times' report on the president's tax returns, that Trump appears to be personally responsible for in loans and debt.  report The Republican National Committee (RNC) and the Trump campaign have also confirmed that this email did not originate with them. RNC spokeswoman Mandi Merritt told PolitiFact: "That is a fake." PolitiFact Buettner, Russ; Craig, Susanne; McIntire, Mike.  "Long-Concealed Records Show Trump's Chronic Losses and Years of Tax Avoidance."
  New York Times.  2 October 2020. Funke, Daniel.  "Trump Did Not Ask Supporters for $421 Million."
  Politifact.  2 October 2020. On Aug. 5, 2023, Jim Ferguson, a former candidate for a seat in British Parliament whose social media presence is steeped in false conspiratorial claims, posted to X, the social media outlet formerly known as Twitter, a message about the state of 5G cellular technology in Russia: false conspiratorial claims about  Citing an article from a purported Bangladeshi news website named dainikbidyaloy.com, Ferguson suggested that Putin had "ban[ned] 5G across Russia'' and "destroy[ed] All [5G] Towers," suggesting this "massive step" likely meant Russia knows something negative about the technology that the West does not. 5G is a cellular technology that operates at a higher frequency band than 4G and can carry more data as a result. an article cellular technology Dainikbidyaloy.com is not, in fact, a credible source of information. It is a website that republishes content that originated on Real Raw News, a prolific source of disinformation. that republishes Real Raw News The story Ferguson shared to nearly a million people originated on Real Raw News on Aug. 5, 2023  a site with a satire disclaimer  andasserted that Putin had ordered the end of 5G in Russia and that he even publicly executed a tech executive over it: originated on Real Raw News asserted Russian President Vladimir Putin has banned 5G towers in the Russian Federation amid concerns the technology is medically unsafe and has caused the deaths of school children near St. Petersburg. His mandate wasn't well-received by the Telecom executives. MTS Vice President of 5G Infrastructure Borya Vlasov said the absence of 5G would put Russia at a technological disadvantage, adding that Russia needed 5G to strengthen a once-thriving economy now faltering thanks to Putin's actions in Ukraine. [...] Putin ordered the security agent beside him to shoot Vlasov squarely between the eyes. Without hesitation, the agent drew his Makarov pistol and put a bullet in Vlasov's forehead in full view of 15 people. Real Raw News carries a disclaimer on its "About Us" page that says "Information on this website is for informational and educational and entertainment purposes" and that it "contains humor, parody, and satire. a disclaimer In reality, Russia is working to expand 5G access and reduce a technology gap created by the retreat of western telecom technology since the full-scale invasion of Ukraine by Russia in February 2022. In a speech made in June 2023, Russian Prime Minister Mikhail Mishustin reiterated Putin's plans in the area of "technological sovereignty," which explicitly called for the creation of Russian-made 5G base stations: a speech The disruption of foreign telecom equipment supplies is posing certain challenges, especially in the mobile segment, where Western solutions were traditionally used. To speed up the transition to Russian base stations for LTE and 5G, the Government and market participants have adopted a roadmap for the development of modern networks. It includes several state support programmes, including 3.5 billion roubles in subsidies for the manufacture of the required high-tech devices to be allocated this year. On Aug. 6, 2023, Andrey Zarenin, the deputy minister of digital development, telecommunications, and mass media of the Russian Federation, also spoke of forward progress on 5G technology at a conference of telecom leaders, according to a news release from that ministry. forward progress About Us | Real Raw News. https://realrawnews.com/about-us/. Accessed 7 Aug. 2023. Baxter, Michael. "Putin Bans 5G across Russia, Destroys All Towers." Real Raw News, 5 Aug. 2023, https://dainikbidyaloy.com/2023/08/05/putin-bans-5g-across-russia-destroys-all-towers/. Digital Development, Telecommunications and Mass Media of the Russian Federation. Andrey Zarenin Represented Russia at the Ninth Annual Meeting of the BRICS Ministers of Communications. 23 June 2022, http://government.ru/en/news/48806/. Mikhail Mishustin Held a Strategic Session on the Telecommunications Industry Development until 2035. 7 Aug. 2023, http://government.ru/en/news/48806/. "Privacy Policy for The People's Voice." Real Raw News, https://dainikbidyaloy.com/privacy-policy-for-the-peoples-voice/. Accessed 7 Aug. 2023. Putin Bans 5G across Russia, Destroys All Towers | Real Raw News. https://realrawnews.com/2023/08/putin-bans-5g-across-russia-destroys-all-towers/. Accessed 7 Aug. 2023. "What Is 5G? - How Does 5G Network Technology Work." Cisco, https://www.cisco.com/c/en/us/solutions/what-is-5g.html. Accessed 7 Aug. 2023. Correction [Aug. 16, 2023]: This story has been updated to reflect that RealRawNews denies any connection with dainikbidyaloy.com. On 13 September 2017, an article claiming that Disney World was permanently closing the Fort Wilderness Campground due to damage sustained from Hurricane Irma was posted to the prank news web site BreakingNews247.com: article prank   Walt Disney has officially announced that they will be permanently closing Fort Wilderness Campgrounds due to damage exceeding over $1 Million from one estimate. This article, along with everything else published on BreakingNews247.com, is fabricated. "Prank" web sites like this one allows users to generate their own fake news stories to share with their friends on Facebook:This website is an entertainment website, news are created by users. These are humourous news, fantasy, fictional, that should not be seriously taken or as a source of information.The creator of this particular story must have felt some remorse after posting it, as the article was later removed and replaced with a message explaining that it had been a "bad joke":Despite the article's deletion, however, the rumor continued to circulate as web sites like ViralDisney.net republished near verbatim copies of the story. These web sites are unaffiliated with Walt Disney World, which has indicated in public statements that Fort Wilderness will soon reopen.   "Prank" web sites like this one allows users to generate their own fake news stories to share with their friends on Facebook: Prank This website is an entertainment website, news are created by users. These are humourous news, fantasy, fictional, that should not be seriously taken or as a source of information. The creator of this particular story must have felt some remorse after posting it, as the article was later removed and replaced with a message explaining that it had been a "bad joke": message   ViralDisney.net The Florida theme park did sustain some damage during Hurricane Irma and the Fort Wilderness campground was temporarily closed. A message on the official Disney World web site explained that the campground will likely reopen by the end of September 2017: damage message explained All Disney Resorts have begun normal operation, with the exception of Fort Wilderness Campground and Disney's Saratoga Springs Treehouse Villas.We anticipate that Disneys Fort Wilderness Resort & Campground will reopen next week, but it remains closed at this time as we clean up the property following the storm. Disney's Wilderness Lodge remains open. We anticipate that Disneys Fort Wilderness Resort & Campground will reopen next week, but it remains closed at this time as we clean up the property following the storm. Disney's Wilderness Lodge remains open.To allow Disneys Fort Wilderness to prepare the property after Hurricane Irma, all shows at The Hoop Dee Doo Musical Revue and Mickeys Backyard BBQ will be canceled up to and including To allow Disneys Fort Wilderness to prepare the property after Hurricane Irma, all shows at The Hoop Dee Doo Musical Revue and Mickeys Backyard BBQ will be canceled up to and including Tuesday September 19th. Any existing reservations will be automatically canceled and refunded. Fox News.  "Disney World Photos Show Hurricane Irma's Damage to Parks."
  13 September 2017.