War Between the States
Claim:  Maps show similarity between 2004 U.S. presidential election results and pattern of free vs. slave states in pre-Civil War America.   Multiple  see below. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2004]  2004 U.S. Presidential Election Results Pre-Civil War Free vs. Slave States  Origins:  This is another example for which it is difficult to assign a value of "" or ""  there is a basic (and somewhat superficial) underlying fact which is true, but interpretations of that fact's significance are subjective and can be widely varied. It is true that a map showing the locations of free and slave states (and territories) in the pre-Civil War U.S. bears a rough resemblance to a map showing the electoral vote results for the 2004 U.S. presidential election. Senator John Kerry won most of the states in the northeast, the Great Lakes, and the Pacific coast regions, while President George W. Bush captured all of the south plus most of the midwestern, western, and plains states.  However, the similarities between these maps mask some very significant differences. On the eve of the Civil War (which began in April 1861), the United States was very sharply divided along regional lines.  Going into the 1860 campaign, the two major parties both essentially  split in two, each creating a northern and a southern wing.  In the subsequent presidential election the northern Whig/Republican party (represented by Abraham Lincoln of Illinois) didn't even appear on the ballot in most southern states, and while the Southern Democratic party (represented by John C. Breckinridge of Kentucky) did make the ballot throughout most of the north, they rarely drew more than a relative handful of votes in those states.  All four candidates captured at least one state's electoral votes, a rarity in U.S. election history. election captured The electorate in 2004 was not nearly so sharply divided along regional lines, however  an electoral map just makes it appear that way because of the "winner take all" nature of the U.S. electoral system.  Both the popular and electoral vote totals in 2004 were quite close (President Bush won the popular vote by a 51%-48% margin, and a single strongly-contested state such as Ohio could have tipped the electoral vote balance in the other direction), and although the states won by each candidate were largely clumped into regional clusters, both candidates generally ran very strongly even in the states they did not win.  An election map with finer gradation (i.e., displaying results on a county-by-county basis rather than a state-by-state one, and providing color shading to reflect the closeness of the vote in each area) produces a better picture of how strongly both candidates in the 2004 election ran even in states which they lost: 2004  (Click here for a larger version of this map.) here According to exit polls and analysis of county-by-county election returns, the sharpest geographic distinction between the two candidates did not primarily correspond to region but to size of community: Senator John Kerry had a substantial 60%-39% edge in large cities (representing roughly 13% of the total U.S. population), while the reverse was true in rural areas (representing roughly 16% of the total U.S. population), where President Bush garnered a 59%-40% majority.  What we saw in the 2004 election was more of an urban vs. rural division, regardless of state. exit polls Last updated:  11 November 2004    Sources:   Alexander, Kate.  "Election Officials Urge Voters to Check Ballots for Errors."   Austin American-Statesman.  23 October 2004  (p. B1).
Jerry Patterson, an unsuccessful candidate for lieutenant governor this year, subsequently said that he somewhat uniquely spoke out for a federal guest-worker program a few years ago. According to a March 30, 2014,news storyin theSan Antonio Express-News, Republicans including state Sen. Dan Patrick of Houston, who's in a May 27, 2014, runoff for the party's lieutenant governor nomination with incumbent David Dewhurst, have talked about not putting language supportive of a guest-worker program in this years party platform, which is to be finalized by delegates to the next state convention in June 2014. Patrick has stumped on securing the Texas-Mexico border, also objecting in a Jan. 25, 2014,Twitter postto the illegal invasion. TheExpress-Newsstory described Patterson, the state land commissioner since 2003, as saying he was the only statewide elected official to speak in favor of the guest-worker plank at the June 2012 state convention where it was initially adopted. Patterson separately said on his2014 campaign website: Many of my elected colleagues privately expressed support, but told me that they just couldnt take the risk. Did Patterson, who often flies his own plane between cities, venture solo in this way? Immigration in 2012 platform The immigration plank, on page 21 ofthe platform, states that mass deportation of all the undocumented individuals in the United States would neither be equitable nor practical, while blanket amnesty would only encourage more illegal entries. The plank also calls for securing the border, modernizing Social Security cards and limiting birthright citizenship to babies born to a U.S. citizen. Finally, the plank calls for a temporary worker program to bring skilled and unskilled workers into the United States for temporary periods of time when no U.S. workers are currently available, to be self-funded through participation fees and fines, the plank says. The guest-worker plank was characterized by proponents at the time as a meaningful breakthrough for the state party. A June 9, 2012, Texas Tribunenews storyquoted TexasGOPvote.com's Bob Price, a convention delegate, as saying adoption of the guest-worker provisions takes away a tool that Democrats have used for years to drive a wedge between conservative Hispanics and Republicans. William Kelberlan, a delegate from Williamson County, told the Tribune: It was a tough pill to swallow; it didn't go down easily. Kelberlan said he recognized the need for immigration reform but thought more time was needed to hammer out the details of what form it should take. Patterson spoke in favor of the guest-worker plank, according to the story, but it was silent on whether he was the sole statewide elected official to do so. Patterson invokes 'cojones' To our inquiry, Patterson indicated he remembers his solo status well. Aint much to elaborate, he said by email. Asked if hed heard the speeches given by other statewide elected officials and why he knows he was alone in this regard, Patterson replied: I know all the statewides. I know what they do and say. I know who hascojones (um, courage) and who doesn't. I was the only one. By email, Steve Munisteri, the party chairman, confirmed Patterson was the only statewide elected official to speak during floor debate of the guest-worker plank and then only after delegates agreed to let him do so, Munisteri said. Separately, Brad Bailey told us he helped draft the relevant language as a delegate from Senate District 11 in Houston. By phone, Bailey said Patterson was alone among statewide elected officials in speaking about the guest-worker section. Main speeches lacked mention of guest-worker idea We didn't have to take anyone's word for this. Munisteri reminded us the party placed video recordings of the convention online. So we watched the speeches given by several statewide elected officials: U.S. Sens. Kay Bailey Hutchison and John Cornyn; Gov. Rick Perry; Lt. Gov. David Dewhurst; Attorney General Greg Abbott; Agriculture Commissioner Todd Staples and State Comptroller Susan Combs. None  plus Patterson, in his main speech to the convention  aired support for a guest-worker law. In fact, only Staples mentioned conditions near the Texas-Mexico border. Patterson spoke from floor during platform debate But as delegates discussed the party platform, Patterson stepped to a microphone on the convention floor after Munisteri adjudged that two-thirds of the delegates, by a show of hands, had agreed to suspend the rules to let him join the conversation even though he wasnt a delegate. (Hear Pattersons remarks starting about the 11:15 mark of thevideo here.) Patterson opened by describing himself as a conservative who believes the platforms immigration plank and border security go hand in hand. He then said he supported the then-pending state law requiring most voters to present photo identification at the polls as well as initiatives stressing English as the states primary language. Patterson said he also supported a physical barrier on the U.S.-Mexico border, including a fence in some cases. He added that he opposed unconditional birthright citizenship, bilingual balance and restrictions on police officers asking someones immigration status during an apprehension or investigation of a crime. Further, he said, he was opposed to amnesty for illegal immigrants. But, Patterson said, I will tell you that I very loudly, firmly and with great fervor support a guest-worker program as part of our border security. We have folks in this country who are here to do us harm, Patterson said. They are criminal, they arecoyotes, they run things back and across the border whether they are illegals, whether they are drugs or contraband. And we also have folks in this country, Patterson continued, who want to work hard, pay their taxes, obey our laws. And there is no way for those to come here and do that lawfully because our immigration system is broken. We need a guest-worker, temporary guest-worker program that is in the immigration plank in our platform, he said. Our ruling Patterson said he was unique among statewide elected officials in speaking for the guest-worker section that became part of the Republican Party of Texas platform in 2012. True. TRUE The statement is accurate and theres nothing significant missing. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. A big part of President Barack Obama's first State of the Union speech on Jan. 27, 2010, focused on the economy.To set the stage, he said his predecessor was largely responsible for the country's fiscal shape.At the beginning of the last decade ... America had a budget surplus of over $200 billion, Obama said. By the time I took office, we had a one-year deficit of over $1 trillion and projected deficits of $8 trillion over the next decade. Most of this was the result of not paying for two wars, two tax cuts, and an expensive prescription drug program.We've checked several claims to this effect in the last year,most recently one by Obama adviser David Axelrod. Indeed, we found that the government was enjoying a surplus of about $236 billion circa 2001. Later, when Obama took office, the Congressional Budget Office reported the deficit was over $1.2 trillion. A good chunk of the deficits racked up by the Bush administration came from tax cuts, the war in Iraq and actions that Bush and a Democratic Congress took to prop up the economy right before he left office.In the same report, the CBO projected a 10-year deficit of about $3.1 trillion. But Obama said $8 trillion, based on budget numbers published by the White House Office of Management and Budget shortly after Obama took office.Why the discrepancy? When we checked the similar claim by Axelrod, we spoke with Josh Gordon, policy director for the Concord Coalition. He said it has to do with how the two offices estimate the future. The CBO bases its projections on the assumption that the Bush tax cuts would expire in 2010 and that a patch to fix the alternative minimum tax would expire, among other things. The White House does not; instead, it assumes that nothing changes in current law.So, Obama's overall point is correct that the government was enjoying a substantial surplus when Bush took office and had a big deficit when he departed; he's spot on about the surplus Bush began with. He's also correct about the deficit at the end of Bush's presidency, but there are two different ways to measure the 10-year projection when Bush left office. The CBO's estimate is $5 trillion lower than the White House numbers, though economists don't quibble with the White House methodology. So given that discussion, we'll take Obama down a notch to Mostly True. Claim:  Former USAF General Dick Hawley delivered a caustic speech about "thoughts of such surpassing stupidity that they must be addressed." Status:  False. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] Speech from the former ACC commander (now retired and not restricted to being politically correct), Gen Hawley.  Since the attack, I have seen, heard, and read thoughts of such surpassing stupidity that they must be addressed.  You've heard them too.  Here they are: 1) "We're not good, they're not evil, everything is relative." Listen carefully: We're good, they're evil, nothing is relative.  Say it with me now and free yourselves.  You see, folks, saying "We're good" doesn't mean, "We're perfect." Okay?  The only perfect being is the bearded guy on the ceiling of the Sistine Chapel.  The plain fact is that our country has, with all our mistakes and blunders, always been and always will be, the greatest beacon of freedom, charity, opportunity, and affection in history. If you need proof, open all the borders on Earth and see what happens. In about half a day, the entire world would be a ghost town, and the United States would look like one giant line to see "The Producers." 2) "Violence only leads to more violence." This one is so stupid you usually have to be the president of an Ivy League university to say it.  Here's the truth, which you know in your heads and hearts already: Ineffective, unfocused violence leads to more violence. Limp, panicky, half-measures lead to more violence.  However, complete, fully-thought-through, professional, well-executed violence never leads to more violence because, you see, afterwards, the other guys are all dead. That's right, dead.  Not "on trial," not "reeducated," not "nurtured back into the bosom of love." Dead.  D-E-Well, you get the idea. 3) "The CIA and the rest of our intelligence community has failed us." For 25 years we have chained our spies like dogs to a stake in the ground, and now that the house has been robbed, we yell at them for not protecting us.  Starting in the late seventies,  under Carter appointee Stansfield Turner, the giant brains who get these giant ideas decided that the best way to gather international intelligence was to use spy satellites.  "After all," they reasoned, "you can see a license plate from 200 miles away." This is very helpful if you've been attacked by a license plate.  Unfortunately, we were attacked by humans.  Finding humans is not possible with satellites.  You have to use other humans.  When we bought all our satellites, we fired all our humans, and here's the really stupid part.  It takes years, decades to infiltrate new humans into the worst places of the world.  You can't just have a guy who looks like Gary Busey in a Spring Break '93 sweatshirt plop himself down in a coffee shop in Kabul and say "Hiya, boys.  Gee, I sure would like to meet that bin Laden fella." Well, you can, but all you'd be doing is giving the bad guys a story they'll be telling for years. 4) "These people are poor and helpless, and that's why they're angry at us." Uh-huh, and Jeffrey Dahmer's frozen head collection was just a desperate cry for help.  The terrorists and their backers are richer than Elton John and, ironically, a good deal less annoying.  The poor helpless people, you see, are the villagers they tortured and murdered to stay in power.  Mohamed Atta, one of the evil scumbags who steered those planes into the killing grounds (I'm sorry, one of the "alleged hijackers," according to CNN-they stopped using the word "terrorist," you know), is the son of a Cairo surgeon.  But you knew this, too.  In the sixties and seventies, all the pinheads marching against the war were upper-middle-class college kids who grabbed any cause they could think of to get out of their final papers and spend more time drinking.  At least, that was my excuse.  It's the same today.  Take the Anti-Global-Warming (or is it World Trade? Oh-who-knows-what-the-hell-they-want demonstrators) They all charged their black outfits and plane tickets on dad's credit card(!) before driving to the airport in their SUV's. 5) "Any profiling is racial profiling." Who's killing us here, the Norwegians?  Just days after the attack, the New York Times had an article saying dozens of extended members of the gazillionaire bin Laden family living in America were afraid of reprisals and left in a huff, never to return to studying at Harvard and using too much Drakkar.  I'm crushed.  I think we're all crushed. Please come back.  With a cherry on top?  Why don't they just change their names, anyway?  It's happened in the past.  Think about it.  How many Adolfs do you run into these days?  Shortly after that, I remember watching TV with my jaw on the floor as a government official actually said, "That little old grandmother from Sioux City could be carrying something." Okay, how about this: No, she couldn't.  It would never be the grandmother from Sioux City.  Is it even possible?  What are the odds?  Winning a hundred Powerball lotteries in a row? A thousand?  A million?  And now a Secret Service guy has been tossed off a plane and we're all supposed to cry about it because he's an Arab?  Didn't it have the tiniest bit to do with the fact that he filled out his forms incorrectly  three times?  And then left an Arab history book on his seat as he strolled off the plane?  And came back?  Armed?  Let's please all stop singing "We Are the World" for a minute and think practically.  I don't want to be sitting on the floor in the back of a plane four seconds away from hitting Mt. Rushmore and turn, grinning, to the guy next to me to say, "Well, at least we didn't offend them." SO HERE'S what I resolve for the New Year: Never to forget our murdered brothers and sisters. Never to let the relativists get away with their immoral thinking. After all, no matter what your daughter's political science professor says, we didn't start this. Have you seen that bumper sticker that says, "No More Hiroshimas"?  I wish I had one that says, "You First.  No More Pearl Harbors." Dick Hawley Origins:  Yes, Gen. Richard E. Hawley is a real person, a United States Air Force general who served as commander of the USAF's Air Combat Command until his retirement in 1999, but no, he didn't write or deliver the speech quoted above.   This "speech" is actually a column by humorist Larry Miller which appeared in The Daily Standard Gen. Richard E. Hawley Air Combat Command The Daily Standard People have been making New Year's resolutions for a long time. Usually they're personal and last no longer than a smoke ring or one of Tom Daschle's smiles. You know the drill: "I'm going to cut down on my drinking, lose a few pounds, and read more books." Of course, by January 3rd, you get drunk, order a pizza, and buy a satellite dish.  This year, though, my resolutions won't be personal, and they won't look forward. They'll look back. Four months back. As you know, since September 11, our leaders and soldiers have done a fine job, frequently a brilliant job. (I mean, please, how about that Rumsfeld? If he were a woman, I'dWait. Come to think of it, I'd still do nothing.) I don't even care that so many of our fellow Americans have been contrary and mealy-mouthed. What makes me want to scream like an actress and throw things is this: Since the attack, I have seen, heard, and read thoughts of such surpassing stupidity that they must be addressed. You've heard them too. Here they are:  [ . . .] So here's what I resolve for the new year: To never forget our murdered brothers and sisters. To never let the relativists get away with their immoral thinking. After all, no matter what your daughter's political science professor says, we didn't start this. Have you seen that bumper sticker that says, "No More Hiroshimas"? I wish I had one that says, "You First. No More Pearl Harbors."  I resolve to be more vigilant and watchful. A good warning sign that these mutts were nuts was when they started dressing their women in heavy-duty, baby-blue bubblewrap. Any man who doesn't want to glance at a woman is, by definition, already very easy to talk into killing himself. Then again, to be fair, we haven't seen their women.  To scream, "Keep going!" when everyone else says, "Stop."  I'll just cut down on my drinking next year. Hell, I really wasn't planning to, anyway. General Hawley said of the words now mistakenly attributed to him: There is a piece zooming around the internet that attributes some pretty forceful statements to me, Dick Hawley - one time fighter pilot, General, thoughtful consultant, neophyte strategist, master of the artful compromise. The words did not flow from my pen, but if the e-mails mean anything, those words are now indelibly linked to my name. So do me a favor - if you receive this, please send it on to the same people to whom you forwarded the one that I did not write.  It's not that I don't share many, if not most, of the sentiments attributed to me, but the piece is just not my style. Here's what I would have said if I'd been asked to comment on those five important issues. 1) Goodness, Evil and Relativity: There are some really good people in this world.  They volunteer to help those who need it, and ask nothing in return. There are also some really bad people in this world.  They exploit those who need help, or who have less wit or "charisma", and motivate them to join in committing unspeakable acts of cruelty against people they don't even know. Then there are the rest of us.  Average people who try each day to do no harm, to provide for their families, to do an occasional act of kindness. The evil that was perpetrated against our land on 9/11 was the product of Mullahs who see our prosperity and power as a threat to their control over the uneducated Muslim masses on whose shoulders they ride through life. And so they preach hate. They are evil. 2) Violence begets violence:  It's true.  Violence does beget violence.  But sometimes there is no alternative but to confront those who would perpetrate evil acts against us.  This is one of those times.  We are blessed to have courageous men and women willing to put their lives on the line to track down and annihilate those who have been so imbued with evil as to be beyond redemption.  But violence is not a strategy.  It is a necessary and fully justified reaction to an unimaginable threat.  But it is not a strategy.  If we are to win this war, we must defeat the Mullahs.  And to defeat the Mullahs, we must find ways to separate them from their uneducated flocks. We cannot kill all those who have been taught to hate us, nor should we wish to.  Far better to change their minds than to change their state of being. 3) The intelligence community let us down:  Well, maybe just a little.  Lots of senior and not so senior intelligence people became just as enamored of high tech gadgets as their political masters.  The protests over our evisceration of the human intelligence component of the agency were not very loud or forceful. Keeping spies on the ground is a high risk and often dirty business, and it wasn't just liberal politicians who didn't have much stomach for it. 4) Poverty is the breeding ground for terrorists:  No, it isn't; but religious extremism is.  The Mullahs fear our wealth and power because it shows that a secular society with democratic institutions and a free market economy can do a better job of taking care of its peoples' needs, both spiritual and physical, than the oppressive Islamic regimes that they aspire to lead.  The Mullahs are the problem, not poverty, but poverty does make it easier for the Mullahs to spread their evil - as do governments that tolerate and even reinforce their hateful message. 5) Profiling: We are at war here!  We are not talking about traffic stops. If we were at war with Iceland, I would expect those charged with our defense to pay very close attention to any Icelander who ventured near our shores.  In this war I expect them to pay very close attention to Muslims with ties to the places that spew hatred against us.  Random checks when there are no such obvious targets available are a good way to keep the evil ones guessing, but let's not make small children and grandmothers take their shoes off while we watch far more likely candidates walk aboard unchecked. 6) Resolutions:  a. Never forget that what happened on September the 11th of 2001 was an act of war.  b. Never sit silently by while someone tries to justify what happened on that day as an understandable reaction to U.S. policies in the Middle East or elsewhere.  c. Fly our nation's flag proudly - it represents this world's greatest hope to move beyond the pain and suffering that inflict so many across the globe. Richard E. HawleyGeneral, USAF, RetiredFormer Commander, Air Combat Command Last updated:  8 March 2008    Sources:   Miller, Larry.  "You Say You Want a Resolution."   The Daily Standard.  14 January 2002. Claim:  Photograph shows Michelle Obama serving a government funded soup kitchen meal to a person with an expensive cell phone. REAL PHOTOGRAPH; INACCURATE DESCRIPTION Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, June 2009] Recently Michelle Obama went to serve food to the homeless at a government funded soup kitchen.   Cost of a bowl of soup at homeless shelter: $0.00 dollars Having Michelle Obama Serve you your soup: $0.00 dollars Snapping a picture of a homeless person who is receiving a government funded meal while taking a picture of the first lady using his $500 Black Berry cell phone and $100.00 per month cellular service: Priceless      Origins:  The above-displayed photograph is genuine, a snapshot taken on an occasion in March 2009 when Michelle Obama spent some time serving lunch to men and women at Miriam's Kitchen, a social service agency in Washington D.C., as part of the First Lady's effort to "spotlight local organizations, connect with the city and help those in need amid the economic crisis."   However, all the assumptions and implications of the text accompanying this picture are incorrect or unsubstantiated.  To wit:  The photograph does not depict anyone "receiving a government funded meal": Miriam's Kitchen is a privately funded organization with the goal of "providing individualized services that address the causes andconsequences of homelessness in an atmosphere of dignity and respect"; it is not government run or taxpayer funded. Miriam's Kitchen  A cell phone capable of capturing images (even a BlackBerry Pearl) is not necessarily a "$500 phone" with a "$100 per month cellular service."  Many much more affordable options are available, including cellular providers who give free phones to low-income customers under the Lifeline assistance program.  So a homeless person might very well carry a cell phone, as Scott Schenkelberg, the Executive Director of Miriam's Kitchen, observed when questioned about this photograph during an interview: BlackBerry Pearl affordable Lifeline interview Q: Since the First Lady's visit, both your guests and your food have been the subject of some criticism within the blogosphere. For example, some critics noted thatone of your guests had a cell phone and suggested that it was inappropriate to serve free food to someone who could afford a cell phone.  A: I suspect some people don't understand how inexpensive cell phones are, or how critical they are to this population. These days, you can purchase a cell phone at 7-11 for $10, then pay for minutes as you go. Our clients have a very fragile safety net. Many of them don't have shelter and are extremely vulnerable. For them, cell phones could literally be a lifeline. If they're looking for a job, the cell phone would also be incredibly important  can you even imagine trying to apply for a job without a phone number? Cell phones simply aren't luxuries anymore. If a guest can scrape together some money to purchase a cell phone, I think that's wonderful.  The assumption that a truly homeless person wouldn't have (or couldn't afford) a cell phone is also a mistaken one.  As Scott Schenkelberg noted, the ranks of the homeless served by organizations such as Miriam's Kitchen include not just the long-term, chronically homeless, but also the "newly homeless":  those who had recently been getting by economically until a sudden job loss or other reversal left them with nowhere to go: Until recently, we served mostly the chronically homeless, people who had fallen out of the economy long ago. More recently, we've been seeing more new faces, people who just fell into homelessness or other hard times. These people are generally high-functioning individuals who were hurt by the poor economy. It's very troubling to see previously self-sufficient people coming to Miriam's Kitchen in such high numbers. Last updated:  16 June 2009    Sweet, Lynn.  "Can Michelle Influence what We Eat, Too?"   Chicago Sun-Times.  6 March 2009  (p. C10).    Associated Press.  "First Lady Puts Service on the Menu."   The Australian.  7 March 2009. As Christmas 2017 approached, social media users began circulating an image of a vintage-looking box labeled "Asbestos: Pure White Fire Proof Snow" and questioning if the packaging really contained artificial snow made out of what is now a widely-recognized carcinogen:   In the early half of the 20th Century, asbestos was widely used as Christmas decor because of its white, fluffy appearance -- but that was before the substance was recognized as a major risk factor for an aggressive form of cancer known as mesothelioma, as the Asbestos.com website reports: reports Asbestos was once marketed as artificial snow and sprinkled on trees and wreaths and ornaments. Although those products have not been produced for many years, the oldest decorations that were passed down from one generation to the next, may still have small amounts of asbestos. The most famous asbestos snow scene was used during the filming of "The Wizard of Oz," the 1939 classic with Judy Garland that became the most watched film in history. There is a scene in the movie where snow, made from asbestos, falls on Dorothy and her friends, awakening them from a spell cast by the Wicked Witch of the West. The above displayed above depicts a real item sold to consumers in the mid-20th century. The picture was taken by Tony Rich, an industrial hygienist and amateur photographer who catalogs asbestos images on the photo-sharing platform Flickr using the moniker Asbestos Hunter. Rich, an anti-asbestos activist, originally shot the picture in 2009. Asbestos Hunter picture Rich told us he has the actual box in storage and directed us to another photograph that shows the product was manufactured by National Tinsel Manufacturing Company and sold in the late 1940s through the 1950s: photograph This brand actually contains amphibole asbestos "amosite", very toxic. Generally speaking, asbestos was used by the tens of millions of tons for nearly over a century and a half in modern history for a wide variety of applications, mostly due to its fire resistance, insulating properties, durability/strength, inertness, could be woven, and was cheap and abundant. Major asbestos manufacturers had large [research and development] programs constantly finding new ways to use asbestos. I believe the most tragic use was in cigarette filters. Rich told us many people are surprised to learn that, despite its significant link to cancer, asbestos isn't completely banned in the United States. Aside from raising awareness with his camera as "Asbestos Hunter," Rich serves on the Prevention Advisory Board for the non-profit Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization (ADAO), on whose blog he wrote in 2015: wrote The United States has a very long history of asbestos usage, a tragic history that continues to be written to this day, to the ultimate detriment of its citizensour loved ones, neighbors, and future generations. During that time, tens of millions of tons of asbestos materials were put into our nation's buildings and infrastructure, most of which remains in place today. Eventually, laws and regulations were created in an attempt to help protect employees and the public from the toxic legacy left by asbestos. However, despite the volumes of asbestos standards, many still face ongoing problems related to regulatory under-enforcement, poor risk management or by simply failing to identify basic asbestos hazards. Compounding these issues, asbestos continues to be imported into our country, primarily due to the alarming fact that asbestos has not yet been completely banned. Further, asbestos has been repeatedly found in a wide variety of new consumer products as reported by recent independent studies. Some of these asbestos-containing products include children's toys and crayons, readily available from retail marketplace's shelves. Rich, Tony.  "The United States of Asbestos?"   Asbestos Disease Awareness Organization.  28 August 2017. Smith, Ernie. "The Slow Demise of Asbestos, The Carcinogen that Gave 'The Wizard of Oz' Snow."   Atlas Obscura.  1 August 2016. Mauney, Matt.  "CDC: Mesothelioma Deaths on the Rise."   Asbestos.com.  10 March 2017. Povtak, Tim.  "Christmas Decorations in the Attic Might Be Sprinkled with Asbestos."   Asbestos.com.  1 December 2011. In May 2021, an old and false claim was resurrected about Facebook friends. It claimed that copying and pasting a message with the code "OO5251839" would show a Facebook user's posts to old friends. It would also purportedly allow users to see posts from friends that maybe hadn't appeared in their News Feeds for years. old and false claim message The purported Facebook code began with two letters: "OO5251839." Some variations may have started with zeroes: "005251839."   Posts that soared in popularity in mid-2021 began with: "Thanks for the tip to circumvent Facebook  OO5251839 Works!!" Thanks for the tip to circumvent Facebook...OO5251839 Works!! I have a whole new profile. I see posts from people I didn't see anymore. Facebook's new algorithm picks the same people - around 25-who will see your posts. Hold your finger anywhere in this post and click " copy ". Go to your page where it says " what's on your mind". Tap your finger anywhere in the empty field. Click paste. This is going to circumvent the system. Hello new and old friends! Hello Drop a single hello, thanks! PLEASE SAY HELLO IF YOU SEE THIS. Hello to all! However, this "OO5251839" message had no impact on the Facebook algorithm. Some Facebook users might have thought that the "OO5251839" message worked if they received comments under their posts. However, if this was the case, the explanation is simple. might have thought worked received comments The copy-and-paste message asked friends to say "hello." It would not be a huge surprise that some of the poster's friends saw the message and responded "hello." It's also likely that the more comments a post received, the better it might rank in the News Feeds of friends. As more "hello" comments racked up, it's probably going to show to more friends. Copy-and-paste Facebook rumors have been circulating about as long as Facebook has been around. The "OO5251839" message was not the first time that Facebook users copied and pasted posts that were said to avoid or protect against unwanted aspects of the Facebook platform. For example, in the past we covered a false claim about "copy and paste" and "don't share" messages. We also reported about a dubious warning in regards to Facebook and Instagram purportedly making all posts public. copy and paste" and "don't share making all posts public In sum, the "OO5251839" Facebook message did not circumvent Facebook's algorithm or change anything about a user's Facebook friends. In February2016, links began circulating on Facebookpromising a treasure trove of Sharpie brand markers to users who completed a short series of steps:   The embedded links led toURLs which were generated seemingly at random and didn't link to Sharpie's web site. Users who clicked through to claim the promised prize were routed to pages which appeared plausibly Facebook-esque(but werehostedoff Facebook):   As evidenced by the above-reproduced screenshots, the associatedURLs don'tmatch the official domains of Sharpie or Facebook. The fake giveaway was another version of the common survey/sweepstakes scams which urge readers to share freebie bait on Facebook, which then spreads the scam to more friends and groups. Most social media users are familiar with survey scams conducted in this fashion: Kohl's, Costco, Home Depot, Lowe's,Kroger, Best Buy, Macy's, Olive Garden, Publix, Target, and Walmart are among brandsused as enticementsbyscammers, many aiming to capturepersonal information and valuable page likes from Facebook users. Kohl's Costco Home Depot Lowe's Kroger Best Buy Macy's Olive Garden Publix Target Walmart scammers A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureauexplained how to identify and avoidbad actorsimitating high-profilebrands on social media: article Don't believe what you see. It's easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions. Public transportation was one of the topics when Abel Collins, program manager for the Rhode Island chapter of the Sierra Club, was a guest on the June 2 edition of 10 News Conference. Collins, an unsuccessful independent candidate for Congress in the 2nd District in 2012, said one goal of his organization is to cut pollution by getting better funding for the Rhode Island Public Transit Authority, which operates the states bus system. They're stuck. They have declining revenues and increasing demand. And RIPTA has really some of the fullest buses for its transit agency size around the country, he said. So it's really something that should get more attention and hopefully this is the year that the General Assembly sees fit to give RIPTA sustainable funding for the long term. There's a bill to do that and we've been pushing on it for years. We wondered whether RIPTA does, in fact, have some of the fullest buses around. We called Collins. He said he was told that factoid by Mark Therrien, the authority's assistant general manager for planning. We called Therrien. He said Collins was correct. When we asked for details, he referred us to theIntegrated National Transit Database Analysis System(INTDAS) which has national statistics over many years for transit systems throughout the United States. The database will generate a list of comparable transit systems around the country. We did that for RIPTA and decided to focus on the 30 that were closest based on a variety of measures such as size, according to the federal ranking. We also looked at six other systems -- in Eugene, Ore.; Fort Worth, Texas; Jacksonville, Fla.; Memphis, Tenn.; Louisville, Ky.; and Des Moines, Iowa -- that Therrien said were comparable as well. But what to look at? The database, whose most recent statistics were from 2011, doesn't include a direct measurement of how full the buses are. We discovered there were a lot of indirect ways to estimate capacity that gave different rankings. Therrien said we should look at passengers per hour. By that measure, RIPTA ranked 8th out of 37 systems. We also looked at the number of passenger trips divided by the number of vehicles in operation during peak hours. RIPTA ranked 9th by that measure. Meanwhile, we received an e-mail fromAlbert Gan, a professor with the department of civil and environmental engineering at Florida International University, who developed the INTDAS system. He said the correct method would be to divide the number of passenger miles in a year by the number of miles driven when the buses were picking and dropping off passengers (known as revenue miles). By that measure, RIPTA ranked 13th out of 37. Then we heard back from Therrien's office, which advised us that it was best to look at the number of passenger trips divided by the number of revenue miles. In that instance, RIPTA ranked 10th. Some other systems were pretty crowded using that yardstick. Milwaukee had 24 percent more passengers per bus than Providence; Madison had 34 percent more; Eugene had 39 percent more; and Rochester, N.Y. had 46 percent more. To sum up, Abel Collins said, RIPTA has really some of the fullest buses for its transit agency size around the country. Some of the fullest is a little vague, but it implies that Rhode Island is going to be up there in the rankings. RIPTA, asked about the claim, suggested that we look at 11 transit systems. We ultimately analyzed data on more than three times that many, using a federal rating method that listed bus services comparable to Rhode Island's. RIPTA's rankings ranged from 8th to 13th. They varied a bit because there's no standardized way to calculate who has the fullest buses. Because there's some uncertainty but the different methods show RIPTA ranking high, we rate Collins' statementMostly True. (If you have a claim youd like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, e-mail us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.) Claim:  Russian forces will be providing security at large events in the U.S.   Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, July 2013] I have been told that some sort of deal between the Obama administration and the Russian govt. would allow Russian military forces to act as security, on American soil, during large, special events (such as Super Bowl) or in the case of national emergencies.  Any truth here?  I already know how the Constitution treats such things.  Now days, it doesn't seem to matter tho.  Has FEMA struck an agreement with Russia that will provide for the Russian Military to provide crowd control at U.S. events on American Soil?  This was reported as true in a post I saw on FB and reported that these soldiers would be able to fire on and kill Americans on U.S. soil. Origins:  On 26 June 2013, Russia announced an agreement between the United States Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry  to share information and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers from each other's countries during joint rescue operations: announced The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and the USA Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) are going to exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters. This is provided by a protocol of the fourth meeting of the U.S.-Russia Bilateral Presidential  Commission Working Group on Emergency Situations and seventeenth meeting of Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations, which took place in Washington on 25 June. The document provides for expert cooperation in disaster response operations and to study the latest practices. In addition, the parties approved of U.S.-Russian cooperation in this field in 2013-2014, which envisages exchange of experience including in monitoring and forecasting emergency situations, training of rescuers, development of mine-rescuing and provision of security at mass events. At the end of the meeting the parties expressed their satisfaction with the level of cooperation between the Russian Federation and the United States in the area of emergency prevention and response and agreed to develop it in order to respond efficiently to all kinds of disasters. The conspiracy site Infowars then spun this announcement into a claim that Russian military forces would be providing security for large events in the United States such as the Super Bowl and presidential inaugurations: Infowars As part of a deal signed last week in Washington DC between the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry and FEMA, Russian officials will provide "security at mass events" in the United States, a scenario that wont sit well with Americans wary of foreign assets operating on US soil. According to a press release by the Ministry of the Russian Federation for Civil Defense and Emergencies, US and Russian officials met on June 25 at the 17th Joint U.S.-Russia Cooperation Committee on Emergency Situations. In addition to agreeing with FEMA to "exchange experts during joint rescue operations in major disasters," the Russian Emergency Situations Ministry will also be providing "security at mass events" in the United States. This suggests that events designated as "National Special Security Events" by the Department of Homeland Security, which include the Super Bowl, international summits such as the G8 and presidential inaugurations, will now rely partly on Russian authorities to provide security. However, the Infowars article was an alarmist, far-fetched interpretation of the original announcement, which said nothing about Russia's providing security for events taking place within the U.S.  The Russian Emergency Situations Ministry announcement merely noted that "provision of security at mass events" was one of the areas of interest which the two countries hoped to study and learn about from each other as part of their joint agreement. FEMA and the Russian news agency RIA Novosti quickly debunked Infowars' unsupported assumption, stating plainly that the U.S. and Russia would not be deploying security guards or military forces in each other's countries: The top US emergency response agency moved to quell a flurry of Internet-driven speculation that Russian security teams could be deployed at large public events in the United States, saying the two countries will not swap security guards or soldiers under a long-running partnership agreement. There will be "no exchange of security or military personnel" under a recently renewed partnership between the US Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) and Russias Emergency Situations Ministry, a FEMA spokesman told RIA Novosti. "The agreement continues information-sharing meetings and observation opportunities with first responders and emergency managers," the spokesman said. Picking up on an Emergency Situations Ministry statement declaring that partnership agreement "envisages the exchange of experience" in "the provision of security at mass events," numerous websites suspicious of the US governments encroachment on its citizens' rights suggested the deal means Russian security guards could be deployed at major public gatherings. The libertarian website Infowars.com, run by radio host and conspiracy theorist Alex Jones, proposed these events could include US presidential inaugurations and the Super Bowl. The FEMA spokesman said that while the US agency will not exchange security or military personnel with its Russian counterpart, the two sides "agreed to an exchange of emergency management experts to share best practices  a continuation of a 17 year partnership." Last updated:   2 July 2013 In July 2019, an $80 coupon began making the rounds on Facebook for the ALDI grocery store chain. These shared posts were the latest iteration of the common "free coupon" or "free gift card" scams that frequently plague social media and have also preyed on shoppers of chains such as Kroger and Target: Kroger Target  A different scam coupon offer also circulated with the ALDI logo in December 2015, advertising a "get 40% off all purchases in store" promise. Another displayed what appeared to be a free coupon for "$60 off a minimum $70 purchase", and even one for $75 off:  "Aldi has a coupon for $60 off a minimum $70 purchase. Aldi has verified this is a scam, but people are sharing it all over facebook." These coupons are not legitimate, as ALDI themselves noted on their Facebook page:  These coupon offers are a form of survey scams that direct victims to either a survey on an website not owned by ALDI, or what looks like a Facebook page for ALDI. The survey pages nor the Facebook page have any affiliation with the company, despite being adorned with the ALDI logo. Both instruct people to share the bogus ALDI coupon offer on their Facebook timelines and submit comments about it:  This page instructs shoppers to follow these "two simple steps" in order to get their coupons. Once the steps are completed, however, users are not greeted with information explaining how to claim their coupons. Instead, they're asked to take a brief survey that entails providing personal information such as home address, telephone number, e-mail address, and date of birth, and are required to sign up for credit cards or enroll in number of subscription programs in order to obtain their "free" gift cards:  A version of the scam also surfaced in May 2016, and another later in 2018. ALDI responded to frustrated consumers on Facebook:  In June 2017, a version of the scam touting discounts in honor of ALDI's purported anniversary also appeared on Facebook: "HEY FRIENDS CHECK THIS OUT!!!!!Aldi is giving Free $75 Coupon to Everyone to celebrate 103rd Anniversary!Each Person (1)- Go & get yours!ALDI-COM.COM" However, attempting to visit the linked domain (ALDI-COM.com) led to a "deceptive site ahead" warning and not to ALDI's official web site:  If you frequently use Facebook, there is a good chance that you'll run into one of these survey scams again. A July 2014 article from the Better Business Bureau lists key factors for identifying fraudulent Facebook posts: article "Dont believe what you see. Its easy to steal the colors, logos and header of an established organization. Scammers can also make links look like they lead to legitimate websites and emails appear to come from a different sender. Legitimate businesses do not ask for credit card numbers or banking information on customer surveys. If they do ask for personal information, like an address or email, be sure there's a link to their privacy policy. When in doubt, do a quick web search. If the survey is a scam, you may find alerts or complaints from other consumers. The organization's real website may have further information. Watch out for a reward that's too good to be true. If the survey is real, you may be entered in a drawing to win a gift card or receive a small discount off your next purchase. Few businesses can afford to give away $50 gift cards for completing a few questions." All in all, trying to claim that "free" deep discount ALDI coupon is likely going to end up costing you a lot more than you'll save. Patterson, Emily.  "Customer Survey Scam Lures Victims with Gift Card." 
  Better Business Bureau.  4 July 2014. 10 July 2019: This story has been updated with a scam offer appearing on Facebook that promises $80 off at ALDI.