Under President Barack Obama,Weve got the lowest labor force participation in over three decades, since 1978.
President Barack Obamas upcoming State of the Union address gave Republicans and Democrats on the Sunday news shows another chance to make their case about the countrys economic performance over the past five years. OnFox News Sunday,Obama adviser Dan Pfeiffer pointed out the country has added 8 million jobs since the health care law passed in March 2010. Sen. Ted Cruz, R-Texas, offered a different take on the state of the labor force onFace the Nation. Why are jobs and economic growth so dismal? he asked. Weve got the lowest labor force participation in over three decades, since 1978. And if President Obama wants to give an honest, candid State of the Union address this week, hell address the fact that his economic policies are not working. It's difficult to say how Obama's policies are causing the economy to stall or succeed, but we can examine Cruz's specific claim about labor force participation. Cruz, whose press office did not respond to our request for comment, is correctly breaking down data from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics. The labor force participation rate is another measurement of the health of the labor market. The unemployment rate is the number of people who are not working as a percent of the labor force. There are multiple lenses through which to view jobs data. Another measure, thelabor force participation rate, refers to the percentage of Americans who are considered to be in the labor force as a part of the overall population. To be counted in the labor force, someone must be working or actively looking for work. In December (and also October), the labor force participation rate was 62.8 percent. In January and March of 1978, it was also 62.8 percent. We know what youre thinking: Cool numbers, PolitiFact, but what do they mean? Take a look at the trend. The labor force participation rate had been increasing since 1948, the first year the labor force participation rate was calculated. Then, it was 58.6 percent. It peaked in the late 1990s and 2000 to just more than 67 percent, before more recently hitting its lowest point in 36 years. Its fallen 2.9 percentage points since Obamas first month on the job in January 2009. Whats happening is the subject of an ongoing debate. There is understandable concern about the countrys long-term unemployed anddiscouraged workers. The economic recovery from the 2007-09 recession has been slow, which may have propelled people to go back to school, stay at home with their kids or give up on a search altogether when they could not find jobs in their field. Still, many economists attribute at least a portion of the drop to an unsurprising reason: the retirement of baby boomers, which does not exactly qualify as an American horror story. The trick is to determine how much of the drop represents the impact of a lagging economy, which is worrisome, and how much is due to non-worrisome factors, such as the aging of the adult population, said Gary Burtless, an economist at the Brookings Institution, ina 2013 PolitiFact interview. Theres no reason to believe things will change anytime soon. The labor force will become older, slowly add workers as the overall population grows and become more racially diverse in the next decade, according to theBureau of Labor Statistics. BLS researchers say the labor force participation rate will continue to slowly fall until hitting 61.6 percent in 2022 -- a projected decline of 1.2 percentage points since December 2013. The past decade saw a much more dramatic drop, declining 3.6 percentage points since December 2003. Our ruling Cruz said, Weve got the lowest labor force participation in over three decades, since 1978. Were pretty confident Obama isnt asking Cruz for State of the Union talking points, and hes especially not interested in one that may suggest todays economic policies arent working. Cruz has his statistics right. But well note at least part of the trend has been years in the making and appears strongly tied to the inevitable aging of the baby boomer population. In other words, its not all Obamas fault, and its not going to change the minute he leaves office. We rate Cruzs statement Mostly True.
A Florida House bill that would make school districts share capital funding with charter schools has sparked a debate over how much money the privately run institutions should get. A bill sponsored by Rep. Erik Fresen, R-Miami, would in part require that charter schools have access to local school board levies that are normally reserved for traditional public schools capital improvements. Charter schools are financed with taxpayer money but managed by private companies. Initially touted as an option for students attending low-performing public schools, charters have grown in popularity. Critics have complained that too many taxpayer dollars have subsequently been shifted to the private companies that run charters, while traditional schools suffer from a lack of resources. In aHouse Appropriations Committee hearingfor Fresen'sHB 873, Republicans supported equal access to capital improvement funds by charter schools. I think it is time that we recognize that there is great disparity, tremendous disparity, in the funding on a per-student basis between our traditional public schools and our charter public schools, said Rep. Janet Adkins, R-Fernandina Beach, at the Feb. 9 hearing. The bill hasdrawn some extra scrutinybecause Fresen works for an architecture firm that builds charter schools and his sister and brother-in-law are executives for the state's largest charter-school operator. The bill passed Appropriations 19-5 and on Feb. 17 passed the Education Committee, 13-4, both times along party lines. These votes move the bill to the House floor. The Legislature has argued about charter-school funding for years, and the subject is confusing, to say the least. We wanted to run the numbers to see if Adkins, acandidate for Nassau County Schools superintendent, is correct to say theres a tremendous disparity between charter and traditional schools. It turns out that while the figures arent so easy to decipher, it seems Adkins has a point. School funding 101 Florida has 4,270 public schools with around 2.7 million children enrolled and more coming every month. Those figures include some 650 charter schools across the state, with about 250,000 students. Charter-school enrollment has grown at least fivefold in the last decade. That means statewide, there are more than six traditional schools for every charter school. But since charter schools often have much smaller enrollments than their counterparts, traditional schools have almost 11 students for every one in a charter. Calculating school funding is confusing alchemy that mixes money from the state and local governments, including several kinds of tax revenues, grants and awards. Many of these sources are earmarked for specific things, like vocational-technical career centers and money to even out class sizes. For this fact-check, well focus on capital outlay costs, which are dollars set aside largely for construction and maintenance. Adkins confirmed to PolitiFact Florida she was referring specifically to those capital dollars, not operating funds. State money for operations is allocated annually by the Legislature on a per-pupil basis  around $7,100 per student  and given to school districts, which divide the money among charter and traditional public schools. (This is the cash Gov. Rick Scott likes to mentionwhen he talks about school funding.) Capital funding is a different story. Districtshave been under pressureto build schools as Floridas population grows, and a good chunk of the capital funding the state sets aside for schools is to pay down debts on projects theyve already completed. Many charter schools, however, lease the property they occupy instead of erect new buildings, so much of their capital funding goes to paying rent. Thats a controversial practice on its own, since districts areoften left without assets if a charter school closes. There areseveral sources for these capital dollars, but were going to look at the two most relevant sources: state Public Education Capital Outlay money and local school board levies. Split access As charter schools grew more popular, the Legislature gave them more of the state capital money, known as PECO, than it gave traditional schools  whichreceived nothing from that fund in some years. The totals have been in flux recently, but charter schools get vastly more PECO money than traditional schools on a per-student basis. Last year lawmakers gave $50 million to those 650 charter schools and $50 million to the other 3,600 traditional schools. That gives charter schools a bit more than $200 per student in PECO funding, while traditional schools get roughly $20 per student. The Legislature iscurrently debating how much to allocate for 2016-17. (As lawmakers head into budget negotiations, the House has proposed $90 million in capital funding for charter schools. The Senate has offered charters zero capital dollars. Both chambers would keep traditional schools capital outlay at $50 million.) But school boards have the power to add to their capital budgets in the form of levies. These levies can be up to 1.5 mills (thats $1.50 per $1,000 in taxable property values) on an annual property tax bill. Money from those local levies, however, is largely off limits to charters. State statute allows districts to share this money with charter schools, but only five districts do. Fresens bill would require school districts toshare a portion of this money with charters. Districts argue these local levies are needed to keep up with ever-growing communities. A common argument is that the districts have needed this money as the state has cut other sources of funding. Its important to remember that not every district levies these taxesat the same rate or brings in the same amount. But theres no denying its a huge pot of money to which charter schools dont have ready access. According to the Florida Department of Revenue, these levies created an annual pool of about $2.3 billion statewide in 2015. Traditional schools also receive an additional $850 million or so in dedicated capital funding along with their PECO money,a House comparison says. Charter schools Traditional schools PECO funding $50 million $50 million School board levies N/A* $2.3 billion Other state and local revenues N/A $850 million Total capital outlay funding $50 million $3.2 billion Full-time students 250,000 2.4 million Capital funding per student $200 $1,300 Sources: Florida Department of Education, Florida Department of Revenue, Florida House Appropriations Committee, Office of the Speaker of the House * Five counties share some levy funds with charters These figures are rounded estimates, of course, and we need to remember that traditional schools and charter schools face different challenges. It also doesnt include money from bonds that school districts can ask voters to approve. But using these estimates, we found that traditional schools have a more than 6 to 1 ratio of capital dollars than do charters. Wed consider that a pretty big disparity, regardless of the reasons behind the policies. Our ruling Adkins said, There is great disparity, tremendous disparity, in the (capital) funding on a per-student basis between our traditional public schools and our charter public schools. While charter schools do get a larger per-student share of one kind of state capital funding, traditional schools can bring in much more by taking advantage of school board levies and other sources that charters cant access. There are many fine details that can get lost in discussions about the subject. But we found that currently, traditional schools potentially can get six times the capital funding per pupil than charter schools can. The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. We rate it Mostly True. FACT CHECK:  Did President Obama "suspend" the Second Amendment?  Claim:  President Obama has "suspended" the Second Amendment.     Examples:  [Collected via Twitter, October 2015] BREAKING NEWS- President Barack Hussein Obama Jr. SUSPENDS 2ND AMENDMENTRead more at https://t.co/CVT80kEfls https://t.co/CVT80kEfls  The Dc Gazette (@TheDcGazette) October 2, 2015 October 2, 2015   This is bull crap. Get rid of this idiot! He cant do this https://t.co/oqv0GWX1d2 https://t.co/oqv0GWX1d2  Mason Page (@MasonKanePage) October 2, 2015 October 2, 2015   Origins:   On 1 October 2015, ten people were killed in a mass shooting at Umpqua Community College in Roseburg, Oregon.   In the wake of the incident (and ensuing interest in the topic of gun violence), the disreputable web site Universal Free Press published an article with the clickbait headline "BREAKING NEWS  President Barack Hussein Obama Jr. SUSPENDS 2ND AMENDMENT," stating that: mass shooting In a move unprecedented by a sitting president and in wake of the recent mass shooting in Oregon, Barack Obama said Ive had enough and I will not allow more women and children to die by gun violence on my watch. Sources on Capitol Hill say, that Obama while in a cabinet meeting, was handed the recent statistical reports on violent crime and at the same time was told of another mass shooting, it was then that he exclaimed Are you joking, this is unacceptable and THIS time Im going to do something about it! He continued by saying, For too long, have I sat idly by and watched crime after crime be committed when there was a gun involved, well NO MORE, I have to think of the safety of the American people, after all, I took a solemn oath to do so. Sources close to the president explained that suspending a constitutional right was not within his power, Obama exclaimed,  I have certain powers granted to me and I intend to use them to keep the citizens of this great nation safe, if there is a legality issue, we can sort it out later. A few (but not all) users who shared the link on Twitter noted that the article was both prefaced by and concluded with a note indicating that its claims were entirely fabricated (and calculated to take advantage of the tragedy and produce revenue-generating traffic by provoking baseless outrage): *Disclaimer* This article is satire and there is no basis of fact for it to be taken seriously. Last updated:     2 October 2015 Originally published:   2 October 2015 As Donald Trump was sworn in as the 45th President of the United States on 20 January 2017, many people noticed some considerable changes to the official White House web site at WhiteHouse.gov web site, such as the seeming removal of the terms "LGBT" and "climate change": noticed It is true that searching for these terms immediately after the inauguration returned no related results:    However, it's inaccurate to say that these terms were specifically scrubbed from the site by Donald Trump. On 17 January 2017, WhiteHouse.gov issued an announcement explaining the digital transition that would take place on Inauguration Day. For instance, all of the messages posted by Barack Obama under the @POTUS handle on Twitter were transferred to a new @POTUS44 account, giving Donald Trump the opportunity to take over the previous presidential Twitter account @POTUS. announcement Twitter In the same way, the content related to the Obama administration on WhiteHouse.gov was migrated to a new web site, ObamaWhiteHouse.Archives.gov: Where you canaccess archival Obama White House content After January 20, 2017,materials will continue to be accessible on the platforms where they were created, allowing the public continued access to the content posted over the past eight years. WhiteHouse.gov becomes ObamaWhiteHouse.gov The Obama White House website  which includes press articles, blog posts, videos, and photos  will be available at ObamaWhiteHouse.gov, a site maintained by the National Archives and Records Administration (NARA) beginning on January 20, 2017. If you are looking for a post or page on the Obama administrations WhiteHouse.gov from 2009 through 2017, you can find it by changing the URL to ObamaWhiteHouse.gov. For example, after the transition, this blog post will be available at ObamaWhiteHouse.gov/obama-administration-digital-transition-moving-forward. ObamaWhiteHouse.gov/obama-administration-digital-transition-moving-forward Content regarding the terms "LGBT" and "climate change" are still readily available on ObamaWhiteHouse.gov. ObamaWhiteHouse.gov As of this writing, Whitehouse.gov is sparsely populated. Its blog currently hosts one post (about the inaugural address), while pages for Press Briefings, Statements, Nominations, and Presidential Actions are all blank:  One of the new pages that has since gone up up on Whitehouse.gov (titled "An America First Energy Plan") suggests that the Trump administration will be targeting previous climate initiatives in order to help boost domestic oil and gas industries: new pages Energy is an essential part of American life and a staple of the world economy. The Trump Administration is committed to energy policies that lower costs for hardworking Americans and maximize the use of American resources, freeing us from dependence on foreign oil. For too long, weve been held back by burdensome regulations on our energy industry. President Trump is committed to eliminating harmful and unnecessary policies such as the Climate Action Plan and the Waters of the U.S. rule. Schulman, Kori.  "The Obama Administration Digital Transition: Moving Forward."
  The White House.  17 January 2017. Commenting on Gov. Greg Abbott pressing sheriffs to detain individuals living in the country without legal authorization, a reader brought up workers who groom the grounds of the Texas Capitol. Illegal immigrants mow the grass around the Capitol,said a Facebook commentposted Nov. 10, 2015, in reaction to theAustin American-Statesmans summary of the papers Nov. 5, 2015,news storyabout Abbott telling Texas sheriffs he might withhold criminal justice grant aid if they dont fully comply with federal requests for detaining criminal immigrants held in their jails. The newspaper published that comment, among others, prompting us to wonder: Do undocumented workers really mow the Capitol lawn? We attempted to reach the commenter to see how he reached his conclusion and didnt hear back. Nationally, according to a July 2015web postby the Pew Research Center, undocumented immigrants make up 5.1 percent of the nations labor force. In the U.S. labor force, the post says, there were 8.1 million unauthorized immigrants either working or looking for work in 2012. Among the states, Nevada (10%), California (9%), Texas (9%) and New Jersey (8%) had the highest shares of unauthorized immigrants in their labor forces. Closer to home, we reached the State Preservation Board, which manages the Capitol and nearby state facilities. By email, spokesman Chris Currens said the board contracts with a private company to care for the grounds and that company is required to use the onlinefederal E-Verify system, authorized by Congress in 1996, which enables users to determine whether employees are citizens or have a required visa to work legally here. In short,the government says, employers submit information taken from a new hire's Form I-9 (Employment Eligibility Verification Form) through E-Verify to the Social Security Administration and U.S. Citizenship and Immigration Services to determine whether the information matches government records and whether the new hire is authorized to work in the United States. U.S. employers submit the Form I-9 for each employee; on the form, an employee must attest to his or her employment authorization. In addition, agovernment summarysays, the employee must present his or her employer with acceptable documents showing who they are and that theyre eligible to work in the country. Documents that fit the description, according to the form, include passports and permanent resident or alien registration cards. A note: E-Verify may be a flawed method of weeding out ineligible workers. In a July 2015report,the Cato Institute pointed out that a government-commissioned analysis estimated that 54 percent of unauthorized workers submitted to E-Verify were incorrectly found to be work authorized because of rampant document fraud. The citedWestat report, published in 2009, elaborated: This finding is not surprising, given that since the inception of E-Verify it has been clear that many unauthorized workers obtain employment by committing identity fraud that cannot be detected by E-Verify. An upshot,Alex Nowrastehof Cato told us by phone, is that even if workers cleared E-Verify, that doesnt mean theyre legal. Back to Texas: In December 2014, then-Gov. Rick Perry ordered agencies to use E-Verify. Perry told reporters then that 17 agencies already employed the system. Currens told us the State Preservation Board initially placed a clause requiring contractors to use E-Verify in April 2009 and grounds contracts have included the clause ever since. Also, Currens noted, each contract requires the contractor to certify that each employee is in compliance with federal immigration laws. The current Capitol groundskeeping contract, which is withClean Scapes, an Austin company, requires the contractor to subject employees to pre-employment and annual criminal background checks. The company also must obtain photocopies of the workers drivers license or state-issued photo identification and Social Security card or Resident Alien work visa/identification card. And the company  must provide documentation showing that this request has been met for all employees working on preservation-board-overseen properties. We asked the agency for the latest documentation. By email, Currens sent anundated noticeto the board from Marilu Sanchez, a Clean Scapes human resources specialist, stating the company had run E-Verify for six employees, each one listed by name. Currens said the notice was submitted to cover the workers at the Capitol in the fiscal year that ended Aug. 31, 2015. By phone, Carmen Zayas, a Clean Scapes vice president, said the landscaping company has long checked all its workers through the E-Verify system. People are always going to make assumptions about the landscaping industry employing immigrants without legal permission to live here, Zayas said. We take that process as seriously as anyone can. By email, Currens told us the board is confident that the groundskeeping workers have proper legal status. Our ruling A Facebook comment published in theAmerican-Statesmansaid: Illegal immigrants mow the grass around the (Texas) Capitol. If so, such immigrants have fooled the federal E-Verify system and the agency that oversees the Capitol grounds. We rate the claim False. FALSE The statement is not accurate. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. State Sen. Jason Carter -- grandson of former Georgia governor and former President Jimmy Carter -- was theguest speakerat a Marietta Rotary Club meeting last month. In Republican-dominated Cobb County, the Decatur Democrat delivered a speech that veered from the traditional GOP message. Carter told the attendees that continual shrinkage of the government -- which has been a conservative standard -- is hurting Georgia in the long run. We collect fewer state taxes per capita than any other state. We have won the small-government competition, he said. ... And although state taxes are low, Georgia is the eighth-most-dependent state on the federal government. Is Georgia collecting fewer state taxes while receiving lots of federal government funds on the back end? PolitiFact Georgia decided to look into it. Carter told us that The Marietta Daily Journal, where we first saw his Rotary Club comments, left out part of his statement. He told the crowd that his tax and dependency claims were based on information from the Tax Foundation, Carter told PolitiFact Georgia in a phone interview. He also cited an Atlanta Journal-Constitutionarticleas a second source for his dependency claim. The discussion was about the difference in the levels of government. And while weve shrunk the federal government, weve increased the burden on the state and local governments, Carter said. The key is the state government taxes. We found the Tax Foundation statistics that Carter cited in the organizations Facts and Figures report of state tax data, released in March. The report, by the nonpartisan tax research group based in Washington, includes state tax and federal dependency data for fiscal year 2011. According to the charts, Georgia ranked last with $1,639 in state taxes collected per capita. (Georgias2010 populationwas about 9.7 million.) The chart is based on the census definition of state tax collections, Tax Foundation officials told us. The next closest state was South Carolina at $1,650. Alaska collected the most state taxes per capita at $7,708. A second Tax Foundation chart, also for fiscal 2011, showed that Georgia also ranked last in the amount of state revenue collected per capita, at $3,807. The revenue data include the taxes levied by the state as well as other general revenue used to operate, such as licenses, fees and transfers from the federal government. We next went to the Census Bureaus state government tax collectionssummary report, released in April, for fiscal 2012 data. Governing magazine, which covers politics, policy and management issues of state and local governments,aggregatedthe census data. We compiled Governings data into a spreadsheet and found that Georgia ranked second-to-last for the lowest total state taxes per capita, at $1,711.44. New Hampshire ranked last at $1,675.94 taxes collected per capita. So Carters tax claim was correct in fiscal 2011 but off a bit for the following fiscal year. On the second part of his claim, Carter again used Tax Foundation data, along with anAJC storypublished about a week before his Rotary Club speech. The Tax Foundation used figures from the Census Bureau to determine states dependence on the federal government. The organization divided each states intergovernmental revenue, or grants and other aid received from the federal government, into the states general revenue, which includes all tax revenue. Those calculations, also in the Facts and Figures 2013 report, showed that Georgia was the ninth-most-dependent state in the nation in fiscal 2011. Federal aid accounted for about 41 percent of general revenue. Mississippi was the most dependent, getting 49 percent of its revenue from the federal government; Alaska was the least dependent with 24 percent. The AJC story reported that about 31.6 percent, about $12 billion, of Georgias state agency spending was made up of federal funds in fiscal 2012, according to the papers review of budget records. The paper found that Georgia has been using federal money to fill budget gaps created by shrinking tax collections and higher demand for state services such as Medicaid. Georgia legislators have discussed forming a committee to study the states federal government dependence. To sum up, Carter said that the Peach State collects fewer state taxes per capita than any other state, yet is the eighth-most-dependent state on the federal government. Based on Tax Foundation and census data for fiscal 2011, Carter is correct on his tax collection claim. Advance the data forward a year and Georgia moves up a step in its collections for fiscal 2012. On federal government dependence, analysis of census data shows that Georgia was the ninth-most-dependent state in fiscal 2011. Carters overall point is that Georgia is fostering a smaller state government but at the same time relying heavily on federal funds. He seems correct on that point. But his calculations were slightly off. We rated his claim Mostly True. Claim:  E-mail reproduces interview with documentary filmmaker Pierre Rehov about the psychology of terrorism. Status:  True. Example:  [Collected via e-mail, 2006] The Psychology Behind Suicide Bombings By Pierre Rehov, documentary filmmaker On July 15, MSNBC's "Connected" program discussed the July 7th London attacks. One of the guests was Pierre Rehov, a French filmmaker who has filmed six documentaries on the intifada by going undercover in the Palestinian areas. Pierre's upcoming film, "Suicide Killers," is based oninterviews that he conducted with the families of suicide bombers and would-be bombers in an attempt to find out why they do it. Pierre agreed to a request for a Q&A interview here about his work on the new film.  Q - What inspired you to produce "Suicide Killers," your seventh film? A - I started working with victims of suicide attacks to make a film on PTSD (Post Traumatic Stress Disorder) when I became fascinated with the personalities of those who had committed those crimes, as they were described again and again by their victims. Especially the fact that suicide bombers are all smiling one second before they blow themselves up. Q - Why is this film especially important? A - People don't understand the devastating culture behind this unbelievable phenomenon. My film is not politically correct because it addresses the real problem, showing the real face of Islam. It points the finger against a culture of hatred in which the uneducated are brainwashed to a level where their only solution in life becomes to kill themselves and kill others in the name of a God whose word, as transmitted by other men, has become their only certitude. Q - What insights did you gain from making this film? What do you know that other experts do not know? A - I came to the conclusion that we are facing a neurosis at the level of an entire civilization. Most neuroses have in common a dramatic event, generally linked to an unacceptable sexual behavior. In this case, we are talking of kids living all their lives in pure frustration, with no opportunity to experience sex, love, tenderness or even understanding from the opposite sex. The separation between men and women in Islam is absolute. So is contempt toward women, who are totally dominated by men. This leads to a situation of pure anxiety, in which normal behavior is not possible. It is no coincidence that suicide killers are mostly young men dominated subconsciously by an overwhelming libido that they not only cannot satisfy but are afraid of, as if it is the work of the devil.  Since Islam describes heaven as a place where everything on Earth will finally be allowed, and promises 72 virgins to those frustrated kids, killing others and killing themselves to reach this redemption becomes their only solution. Q - What was it like to interview would-be suicide bombers, their families and survivors of suicide bombings? A - It was a fascinating and a terrifying experience. You are dealing with seemingly normal people with very nice manners who have their own logic, which to a certain extent can make sense since they are so convinced that what they say is true. It is like dealing with pure craziness, like interviewing people in an asylum, since what they say, is for them, the absolute truth. I hear a mother saying "Thank God, my son is dead." Her son had became a shaheed, a martyr, which for her was a greater source of pride than if he had became an engineer, a doctor or a winner of the Nobel Prize. This system of values works completely backwards since their interpretation of Islam worships death much more than life. You are facing people whose only dream, only achievement goal is to fulfill what theybelieve to be their destiny, namely to be a Shaheed or the family of a shaheed. They don't see the innocent being killed, they only see the impure that they have to destroy. Q - You say suicide bombers experience a moment of absolute power, beyond punishment. Is death the ultimate power? A - Not death as an end, but death as a door opener to the after life. They are seeking the reward that God has promised them. They work for God, the ultimate authority, above all human laws. They thereforeexperience this single delusional second of absolute power, where nothing bad can ever happen to them, since they become God's sword.  Q - Is there a suicide bomber personality profile? Describe the psychopathology. A - Generally kids between 15 and 25 bearing a lot of complexes, generally inferiority complexes. They must have been fed with religion. They usually have a lack of developed personality. Usually they are impressionable idealists. In the western world they would easily have become drug addicts, but not criminals. Interestingly, they are not criminals since they don't see good and evil the same way that we do. If they had been raised in an Occidental culture, they would have hated violence. But they constantly battle against their own death anxiety. The only solution to this deep-seated pathology is to be willing to die and be rewarded in the afterlife in Paradise. Q - Are suicide bombers principally motivated by religious conviction? A - Yes, it is their only conviction. They don't act to gain a territory or to find freedom or even dignity. They only follow Allah, the supreme judge, and what He tells them to do. Q - Do all Muslims interpret jihad and martyrdom in the same way? A - All Muslim believers believe that, ultimately, Islam will prevail on earth. They believe this is the only true religion and there is no room, in their mind, for interpretation. The main difference between moderateMuslims and extremists is that moderate Muslims don't think they will see the absolute victory of Islam during their lifetime, therefore they respect other beliefs. The extremists believe that the fulfillment of theProphecy of Islam and ruling the entire world as described in the Koran, is for today. Each victory of Bin Laden convinces 20 million moderate Muslims to become extremists. Q - Describe the culture that manufactures suicide bombers. A - Oppression, lack of freedom, brain washing, organized poverty, placing God in charge of daily life, total separation between men and women, forbidding sex, giving women no power whatsoever, and placing men in charge of family honor, which is mainly connected to their women's behavior. Q - What socio-economic forces support the perpetuation of suicide bombings? A - Muslim charity is usually a cover for supporting terrorist organizations. But one has also to look at countries like Pakistan, Saudi Arabia and Iran, which are also supporting the same organizations throughdifferent networks. The ironic thing in the case of Palestinian suicide bombers is that most of the money comes through financial support from the Occidental world, donated to a culture that utterly hates and rejects the West (mainly symbolized by Israel). Q - Is there a financial support network for the families of the suicide bombers? If so, who is paying them and how does that affect the decision? A - There used to be a financial incentive in the days of Saddam Hussein ($25,000 per family) and Yasser Arafat (smaller amounts), but these days are gone. It is a mistake to believe that these families would sacrifice their children for money. Although, the children themselves who are very attached to their families, might find in this financial support another reason to become suicide bombers. It is like buying a life insurance policy and then committing suicide. Q - Why are so many suicide bombers young men? A - As discussed above, libido is paramount. Also ego, because this is a sure way to become a hero. The shaheeds are the cowboys or the firemen of Islam. Shaheed is a positively reinforced value in this culture. And what kid has never dreamed of becoming a cowboy or a fireman? Q - What role does the U.N. play in the terrorist equation? A - The U.N. is in the hands of Arab countries and third world or ex-communist countries. Their hands are tied. The U.N. has condemned Israel more than any other country in the world, including the regime of Castro, Idi Amin or Kaddahfi. By behaving this way, the U.N. leaves a dooropen by not openly condemning terrorist organizations. In addition, through UNRWA, the U.N. is directly tied to terror organizations such as Hamas, representing 65 percent of their apparatus in the so-called Palestinian refugee camps. As a support to Arab countries, the U.N. hasmaintained Palestinians in camps with the hope to "return" into Israel for more than 50 years, therefore making it impossible to settle those populations, which still live in deplorable conditions. Four hundred million dollars are spent every year, mainly financed by U.S. taxes, to support 23,000 employees of UNRWA, many of whom belong to terrorist organizations (see Congressman Eric Cantor on this subject, and in my film "Hostages of Hatred"). Q - You say that a suicide bomber is a 'stupid bomb and a smart bomb' simultaneously. Explain what you mean. A - Unlike an electronic device, a suicide killer has until the last second the capacity to change his mind. In reality, he is nothing but a platform representing interests which are not his, but he doesn't know it. Q - How can we put an end to the madness of suicide bombings and terrorism in general? A - Stop being politically correct and stop believing that this culture is a victim of ours. Radical Islamism today is nothing but a new form of Naziism. Nobody was trying to justify or excuse Hitler in the 1930s. We had to defeat him in order to make peace one day with the German people. Q - Are these men traveling outside their native areas in large numbers? Based on your research, would you predict that we are beginning to see a new wave of suicide bombings outside the Middle East? A - Every successful terror attack is considered a victory by the radical Islamists. Everywhere Islam expands there is regional conflict. Right now, there are thousands of candidates for martyrdom lining up in training camps in Bosnia, Afghanistan and Pakistan. Inside Europe, hundreds of illegal mosques are preparing the next step of brain washing to lost young men who cannot find a satisfying identity in the Occidental world. Israel is much more prepared for this than the rest of the world will ever be. Yes, there will be more suicide killings in Europe and the U.S. Sadly, this is only the beginning. Origins:  Pierre Rehov is an Algerian-born filmmaker (his family left Algeria for France in 1961, when he was nine years old) who has Pierre Rehov  produced a number of documentaries about the Middle East, primarily focusing on the Israeli-Palestinian conflict.  In the wake of the 7 July 2005 terrorist bombings in London, he made a number of appearances on television news programs to discuss the causes and nature of terrorism and his experiences in producing films about the subject.  Those appearances included a 15 July 2005 interview for MSNBC's Connected: Coast to Coast, the text of which is reproduced above. documentaries bombings appearances Connected We haven't yet been able to obtain a transcript of the 15 July 2005 Connected program, so we can't guarantee that what is reproduced above is a 100% complete and accurate reproduction of Pierre Rehov's interview.  However, we have verified that he was interviewed on Connected that day, that the substance of his remarks matched what is contained in the e-mail quoted at the head of this page, and that he offered substantially similar comments on other news programs around the same time as his Connected appearance. comments Last updated:  17 August 2006    Sources:   CNN Live Saturday.   "The Psychology of a Suicide Bomber."   CNN.com.  23 July 2005. 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 In September 2020, social media users began circulating a text meme charting the decrease in abortion rates in the U.S. during previous presidential administrations, attributing the greater drop in those rates during Democratic administrations to a difference in approach (i.e., making it illegal vs. making it unnecessary):     As we noted in an earlier article on a similar topic, following the 1973 Roe v. Wade Supreme Court decision that protected a pregnant woman's liberty to choose to have an abortion without excessive government restriction, the abortion rate rose immediately afterward until it peaked in the 1980s, and it has fairly consistently declined since that peak through presidential administrations of both parties: article Following nationwide legalization of abortion in 1973, the total number, rate (number of abortions per 1,000 women aged 1544 years), and ratio (number of abortions per 1,000 live births) of reported abortions increased rapidly, reaching the highest levels in the 1980s before decreasing at a slow yet steady pace.     Although it is true that the abortion rate has experienced greater declines during Democratic administrations than Republican ones, we can't draw any definitive conclusion that, as the meme tries to suggest, this difference is primarily due to varying approaches by the two main political parties. The simple idea presented by the meme has a number of flaws, chief among them that political factors that might influence the abortion rate (e.g., policies, legislation, judicial appointments and rulings) do not neatly conform to presidential terms of office -- what takes place during one administration generally continues to have an effect throughout subsequent administrations. As well, events occurring at state and local levels (not necessarily directly tied to federal actions) can have a substantial impact on the availability and prevalence of abortions. More important, though, is that we cannot definitively determine to what extent political factors influence the abortion rate. As the Guttmacher Institute (a pro-abortion-rights research organization) observed, recent declines in the abortion rate appear to have been driven not primarily by abortion restrictions but by a broader decline in pregnancies: observed Abortion restrictions target either individuals ability to access the procedure (such as by imposing coercive waiting periods and counseling requirements) or providers ability to offer it (such as through unnecessary and intentionally burdensome regulations). Any one of these restrictions could result in some people being forced to continue pregnancies they were seeking to end; this could, in theory, lower the abortion rate. With the available evidence, it is impossible to pinpoint exactly which factors drove recent declines, and to what degree. However, previous Guttmacher analyses have documented that abortion restrictions, while incredibly harmful at an individual level, were not the main driver of national declines in the abortion rate ... Rather, the decline in abortions appears to be part of a broader decline in pregnancies, as evidenced by fewer births over the same period. What's driving that decline in pregnancies, then? We don't know that for sure, either, but likely a combination of social, cultural, economic, medical, and political factors: combination Experts say the decline isnt due to a single cause, but rather a combination of several factors, including changing economics, delays in childbirth by women pursuing jobs and education, the greater availability of contraception, and a decline in teen pregnancies. The trend seen in the United States is also seen in much of the developed world, including Western Europe, said Dr. John Rowe, a professor at Columbia Universitys Mailman School of Public Health. One important factor driving this is the changing roles of women in society, Rowe said. In general women are getting married later in life, he explained. They are leaving the home and launching their families later. [Dr. Helen Kim, an associate professor at Northwestern Universitys Feinberg School of Medicine] said the concept of the ideal family size may be changing. There are shifts where having smaller families is a trend, she added. I cant speak on this as a sociologist, but this is what Ive seen among my peers and colleagues. One of the biggest factors is the decline in teen pregnancies, Rowe said. Thats good news ... And that makes a huge difference to their lives. The Guttmacher Institute posited a similar mix of factors to explain the decline in the abortion rate: Because both abortions and births [have] declined, it is clear that there were fewer pregnancies overall in the United States ... The big question is why. One possible contributing factor is contraceptive access and use. Since 2011, contraception has become more accessible, as most private health insurance plans are now required by the Affordable Care Act (ACA) to cover contraceptives without out-of-pocket costs. In addition, thanks to expansions in Medicaid and private insurance coverage under the ACA, the proportion of women aged 1544 nationwide who were uninsured dropped more than 40% between 2013 and 2017. There is evidence that use of long-acting reversible contraceptive methods -- specifically IUDs and implants -- increased through at least 2014, especially among women in their early 20s, a population that accounts for a significant proportion of all abortions Another possible contributing factor might be a decline in sexual activity. Findings from one national survey suggest a long-term increase in the number of people in the United States -- mostly younger men -- reporting not having sex in the past year. Yet another possibility is that infertility is increasing in the United States, thereby reducing the chances of getting pregnant and subsequently seeking to obtain an abortion. More generally, there are a host of other potential factors that could be driving declines in pregnancy rates, from individuals evolving desires about whether and when to become parents to peoples changing economic and social circumstances. Finally, it is possible that ... there could have been an increase in self-managed abortions happening outside of medical facilities, which the census would be unable to capture. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention (CDC) also offered a combination of potential explanations for lower abortion rates: combination Multiple factors influence the incidence of abortion including the availability of abortion providers; state regulations, such as mandatory waiting periods, parental involvement laws, and legal restrictions on abortion providers; increasing acceptance of nonmarital childbearing; shifts in the racial/ethnic composition of the U.S. population; and changes in the economy and the resulting impact on fertility preferences and access to health care services, including contraception. As we stated four years ago, "causation between the presidency and abortion rates [is] difficult to demonstrate in any case, because it is hard to draw a straight line between federal government policy (let alone presidential policy) and abortion procurement." That observation remains true today. Carroll, Linda and Shamard Charles, M.D.  "Americans Aren't Making Enough Babies to Replace Ourselves."
  NBC News.  13 January 2019. Nash, Elizabeth and Joerg Dreweke.  "The U.S. Abortion Rate Continues to Drop: Once Again, State Abortion Restrictions Are Not the Main Driver."
  Guttmacher Institute.  18 September 2019. Kasprak, Alex.  "Abortion Rates Fall During Democratic Administrations and Rise During Republican Ones."
  Snopes.com.  11 November 2016. InJanuary 2016, a photograph purportedly showing musicians David Bowie and Motrhead frontman Lemmy together at a party started circulating online. The photograph was originally posted to the image sharing web site Imgur on 11 January 2016, along with a caption that referenced the deaths of both musicians. Lemmy passed away on 28 December 2015, and Bowie passed a short time later on 10 January 2016: Imgur Bowie Bowie and Lemmy are about to start the most rocking, stellar band ever.Rock In Peace you legends. The photograph went viral as fans of Motorhead and David Bowie mourned the loss ofthe two rock legends. Unfortunately, the above-displayed image is fake. The fake imageof David Bowie and Lemmy isa combination of two photographs: A 1972photoof Lemmy and an unidentified girlfriend, and another image of David Bowie and singer Claudia Lennear: photo     It's possible that David Bowie and Lemmy Kilmister met at some point during their careers, but the above-displayed photo is not proof of such a meeting. In March 2021, the Sesame Workshop, the nonprofit behind the children's TV show "Sesame Street," introduced two new Black characters as part of its "ABCs of Racial Literacy" program. As Elmo and the other the muppets welcomed Wesley and Elijah Walker to the show, a suspicious screenshot started to circulate on social media that supposedly showed Elmo asking if it was OK to use a slur if he was singing it in a song.  introduced suspicious screenshot   This is not a genuine Elmo quote from "Sesame Street." The above-displayed screenshot shows a message that was originally posted in jest by "Ol QWERTY Bastard" (@TheDillonOne). originally posted in jest While some who encountered the post may have quickly realized that this was a step too far for the children's show, others may have found this quote plausible, as "Sesame Street" truly has tackled some difficult topics, including racism, in its 50-year history.  tackled some difficult topics The above-displayed image, in fact, comes from a scene that dealt with race, albeit in a much less controversial fashion. The following clip, entitled "Explaining Race with Elmo & Wes," features Elmo asking some innocent questions about why Elijah and Wesley have brown skin. Wesley tells Elmo that his skin is brown because of melanin. Wes' father Elijah goes on to say: "Melanin is something that we each have inside our bodies that make the outside or our bodies the skin color that it is. It also gives us our eye and our hair color ... The more melanin you have the darker your skin looks. The color of our skin is an important part of who we are. But we should all know that it's ok that we all look different in so many ways." Here's the full clip from the Sesame Street: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Dk_HYAiS26I&t=2s When the Sesame Workshop announced its new ABCs of Racial Literacy content, they explained that one of the goals of the program was to use "age-appropriate language and strategies to answer sometimes-tough questions around race and racism."  announced Kay Wilson Stallings, executive vice president of creative and production for Sesame Workshop, said: "Sesame Workshop has always stood for diversity, inclusion, equity, and kindness. As a trusted source for families, we have a responsibility to speak out for racial justice and empower families to have conversations about race and identity with their children at a young age ... The work to dismantle racism begins by helping children understand what racism is and how it hurts and impacts people. Sadly, todays announcement comes at a time of racial and social discord when many families are in need of support in talking to their children about racism. Were proud to reaffirm our Coming Together commitment to racial justice, which will be woven into new Sesame Workshop content for years to come. It sounds like something from a horror flick. A small, parasitic creature swims into the mouth of a fish and attaches itself to the organisms tongue  yes, fish have tongues  causing it to slowly degrade before latching onto the stub leftover, thus becoming a parasitic pseudo tongue. Over time, the host loses its ability to eat and slowly succumbs to starvation.   So claims a now-viral Instagram post that was shared in March 2021 by the Smithsonian Institute in appreciation of #ParasiteWeek2021. And if the photo was enough to give you the heebie-jeebies, then you may not want to continue reading. Because both the photograph in question and the supposed parasite featured in it are, in fact, real. The picture featured an organism known as a cymothoid isopod and was originally shared on Aug. 3, 2020, by marine biologist Jimmy Bernot, a post-doctoral scholar with the National Science Foundation and Smithsonians National Museum of Natural History specializing in crustacean phylogeny and parasite evolution. In an email to Snopes, Bernot said that he captured the photo during a 2016 survey of fish parasites of Moreton Bay, Australia.   The host fish is known scientifically as Mugil cephalus or the Flathead mullet.  "Not to be confused with the business in the front, party in the back haircut," said Bernot.  And the parasite seen inside the mullet's mouth is what is known as a cymothoid isopod that measured about an inch long. According to the scientist, it appeared that the fish did use the creepy-crawly as a "pseudo tongue."  The fact that you can see imprints of the fish's teeth on the back of the isopod indicates the fish is crushing items against the isopod similar to how the fish would use its tongue, he said.  Jimmy Bernot  Isopods are marine invertebrates, or animals without backbones, that belong to a greater group of animals called crustaceans. Only a handful of the at least 95 known families of isopods are parasitic, one of which being cymothoid, according to research published in a 2014 issue of the International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife. The cymothoidae family in particular is made up of 350 species of aquatic parasitic isopods. Widely distributed around the world in both oceanic and freshwater habitats, cymothoids are on the larger side of parasites and can reach lengths upwards of a quarter of an inch, with the largest reaching lengths of up to 3 inches. International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife "Cymothoids superficially look like free-living isopods, such as terrestrial rolly-pollies or pillbugs that people may be familiar with, except for their powerful hooked legs that they use to attach to their host," explained Bernot. "As adults, they are not good swimmers and typically stay permanently attached to their host." Equipped with a long, slender body that tapers at the end and sharply curved hooks at the end of its limbs, the cymothoid can attach to its host fish at the gills or mouth as well as externally or inside the host flesh, depending on the species. Cymothoids are generally host-specific, meaning each cymothoid typically attaches to a single host species or a small group of related fish. On a parasitized fish, Bernot said that there will often be a single large female and a few small males attached nearby on the same fish.  Various types of parasitic attachment strategies of cymothoid isopods. International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife  International Journal for Parasitology: Parasites and Wildlife   Only a few species attach specifically to the tongue, and these are commonly called "tongue-biters." Other species attach to the skin or gills, but all have detrimental effects on their hosts including blood loss due to the parasite feeding, skin and tissue damage, deformities, and overall stunted growth and reproductive issues.  And when it comes to the cymothoid featured on social media posts, the Smithsonian Institute wrote that the crustaceans sever the host fishs tongue"  a claim that is only partly true. wrote "The cymothoids feed on blood and perhaps some of the tongue and surrounding tissue in the host's mouth, but the loss and degradation of the tongue are at least partially, if not mostly, due to atrophy of the tongue from mechanical damage caused by the strong, hooked legs that the isopod uses to attach to the base of the tongue," said Bernot. In short, cymothoids do not snip straight through the tongue of the fish, but rather cause such damage that a portion of the tongue can eventually fall off.  And according to the research institution, Bernot's photograph is the only known instance in the animal kingdom where a parasite has been observed as fully replacing its hosts organ. In a reply to his original post, Bernot said that the pictured cymothoid isopod holding caused its host to atrophy  a fancy word for wasting away. Studying parasites like cymothoids helps researchers to better understand evolutionary biology and the unique adaptations that individual species obtain in order to survive.  "It appears different groups of parasitic isopods have independently evolved strongly clawed legs through a process called convergent evolution," said Bernot. "Convergent evolution is of interest to evolutionary biologists and developmental biologists since it gives us insights into how evolution can shape the morphology of animals."  And cymothoids also impact human health and economies because of their effect on fish, which Bernot said could sometimes infect more than 90% of fish on a single farm, including commercially farmed sea bass, bream, and salmon. As gross as it may sound, eating a fish with a parasite is "definitely still safe for humans," but the fish might be smaller or have scars, and Bernot said that means it can't be sold at its highest market value.