Under Mayor Tom Barrett, the number of Milwaukee police officers has not increased.
Milwaukee Ald. Bob Donovan, a candidate for mayor in 2016, worries that upcoming retirements could further reduce what he sees as an undersized police force under Mayor Tom Barrett. Inhis state of the city speech Feb. 24, 2014, Barrett noted he had added 120 new officers in his 2014 budget. Donovan hit on that number when interviewed in the wake of his mayoral announcement. The reality is the number of officers has not increased, Donovan said during a July 29, 2014 appearance on theCharlie Sykes show on WTMJ-AM. Now the mayor will continue to say were hiring 120 cops this year. That doesnt take into consideration the fact that weve had 150 retirements, or that we havent filled positions going way back. When we asked Donovan about the comment, he did not cite hard numbers, but told us he figures unfilled positions and retirements have outstripped the addition of recruits over the 10 years Barrett has been in office. Is Donovan  right? Has police strength -- at least by the numbers -- been flat or gone down on Barretts watch? To answer that question, we turned to the citys Fire and Police Commission, which issues an annual report that details the size of the overall force. To be sure, the actual number of bodies on the force on any given date is constantly changing, since retirement dates vary while recruit classes mean a wave of new bodies joins the force at once. The Fire and Police Commissionreports, available online, are as close to an official tally of police strength as we found. They list, by race and gender, the number of persons on the Police Department payroll as of the last pay period of each year. The latest covers 2012, so we obtained figures for 2013 and so far in 2014 directly from the commission. We used 2004 as the pre-Barrett baseline for our comparisons, because Barrett didnt take office until spring 2004 and therefore did not propose the budget for that year. All figures factor in retirements, terminations and new hires. Police officers At the end of 2004, 1,402 police officers were on the payroll. That number fell to 1,357 by the end of 2013, a 3 percent drop. By that measure -- the one the public sees -- Donovan is correct that officer strength has not increased. Barrett administration officials note it can be misleading to look only at strength of force at any one point in time. A new class of officer recruits came on line in late 2004, boosting the number, they said. A comparison of pay period one in 2004 to the same period in 2014, for example, actually shows a small increase in officer strength. A better measure than point in time comparisons, they said, is average strength across the whole year. That was 1,349 in 2004, they said, and based on the first half of 2014 its 1,341 now -- a smaller decline. Still, that approach does not change the accuracy of Donovans claim. Total sworn officers City officials often will refer to this larger figure when discussing officer strength, and Donovan did as well when we contacted him. It includes not only patrol officers but detectives, supervisors, various technicians and specialists as well as the police chief and the top command staff. At the end of 2004, the figures show 2,006 sworn officers were on board. That number fell to 1,828 by late 2013 and to 1,875 by mid-July 2014. Earlier in 2004, according to Barretts budget staff, the figure was 1,932. And Barretts office released figures using the average strength throughout the year that show a smaller drop in overall sworn strength. Again, those figures change the angle of descent, but not the downward direction of the trend. Within those numbers, the detective ranks fell by more than one fourth. So by this broader measure, Donovan is on target again. Ten-year trend The staff strength figures from the Fire and Police Commission show that the police officer ranks grew early in Barretts tenure, but have slipped gradually with one exception since then. Year 2004 2005 2006 2007 2008 2009 2010 2011 2012 2013 2014 P.O.s* 1,402 1,362 1,390 1,441 1,406 1,392 1,362 1,348 1,384 1,357 1,345** As for the broader sworn ranks, a similar trend is evident. By way of explaining the lack of growth in the police force, Barrett chief of staff Patrick Curley and city budget officials said state shared-revenue aid to Milwaukee has dropped by $25 million since 2004 while the police budget is $65 million higher. They said the department under Chief Edward Flynn has re-deployed officers from administrative tasks to community policing. That was accomplished by hiring more civilians to do those desk jobs, they said. Efficiencies have helped avoid layoffs seen in some big cities, Barrett spokeswoman Jodie Tabak said. The Barrett officials told PolitiFact Wisconsin that our inquiry for this fact check led the mayor to quickly unveil aproposal to add 15 more officers to a training classthat will graduate in April 2015. It already had been under consideration to announce later this year, they said. The mayor will propose his 2015 budget in September. Our rating Donovan said the number of Milwaukee police officers has not increased under Mayor Tom Barrett. Donovans claim is on target because reports from the citys Fire and Police Commission indicate a decline in the number of officers since 2004. And other measuring sticks offered by Barretts office show the same trend. We rate Donovans claim True.
On 12 February 2017, the Facebook page "GreenYatra" published an imagethat bore the claim thatolive oil canbe used to prevent or reverse "sagging breasts": published image   The image-based claim didn't link to any articles or other corroborating information, saying only: Massaging your breasts with olive oil is an excellent technique to firm sagging breasts. Olive oil is a rich source of antioxidants and fatty acids that can reverse the damage caused by free radicals and prevent sagging breasts. Plus, it will help improve the skin tone and texture. According to the claim, topical application of olive oil either circumvents or reverses loss of elasticity in breasts. No specific reason was provided for the claim that olive oil, versus any other type of oil,could replicate the effect shown. The efficacy of topical treatments for sagging breasts or loss of skin elasticity is often discussed in cosmetic circles, thanksin part to the cost and invasiveness of surgical approaches. But research demonstrating any single topical ingredient can prevent (much less reverse) loss of skin elasticity is notably skimpy: notably Antioxidant ointments, creams, and lotions may help reduce the risk of wrinkles and protect against sun damage. Unlike sunscreens, they build up in the skin and are not washed away, so the protection may last longer. Selenium, coenzyme Q10 (CoQ10), and alpha-lipoic acid are antioxidants that can be applied to the skin. Evidence of their benefit is limited and more studies in humans are needed. More commonly used antioxidants are described below. Your dermatologist (skin doctor) can tell you which product is right for you. Research from 2012 indicates that anxioxidants could potentially prevent damage to facial skin, but evidence was "limited" and reversal was not referenced. Only 1.5 percent of olive oil contains antioxidants (and that fraction is not composed entirely of antioxidants). Other foods are described as being higher in antioxidants, but no memes recommended rubbing a berry paste onto breasts for firmness. Research overwhelmingly examined efficacy of topical treatment for facial skin, which lacks the weight and density of breast tissue. And although topicals designed for facial skin need only penetrate a few dermal layers, any product designed or intended for useon breasts would have to enter the breast tissue to "lift" or prevent elasticity loss (a far taller order). contains described A blog post written by Miami-based cosmetic surgeon Dr. Ary Krau directly addressesthe question of whether any specific topical substance (including olive oil) had ever shown promise to improve loss of elasticity for breast tissue in clinical research: addresses Unfortunately, no cream or lotion has been clinically proven or FDA-approved to lift the breasts into a higher position. Dont waste your money on any product that claims to improve your breast position. While genetics play a big role in breast sagging, there are a few things you can do to prevent it in the first place. Try not to fluctuate greatly in body weight; gaining and losing a lot of weight in a short period of time can take its toll on the breasts. Be diligent about wearing sunscreen on your chest and dcolletage area to protect the skin from the suns rays. Wear a supportive bra as much as possible, especially when performing high-intensity aerobic exercise. We contacted Dr. Krau's office, and a representative for the clinic told usthat no effective topical treatment appears to exist. A thorough search of related studies turned up no strong evidence facial skin or breast tissue could be firmed by topical treatments at all. A 5percent concentration of Vitamin C (not olive oil) showedmoderate success in treatment of photo-aging in a small 2003 study, but those findings were not relevant to breast tissue or olive oil. 2003 There isresearch [PDF] (conducted by individuals who contracted with cosmetic medical firms) that indicates somesuccess in the ongoing development of a topical version of botulinum toxin type A (popularly known by the brand name Botox) and intended solely for the face. However, thatresearchonly concerns a clinically prescribed substance (botulinum toxin, not a pantry product) and includedno indications that it could beused on breast tissue. PDF Crawford, Holly.  "Sagging Skin  What You and Your Doctor Can Do."
  WebMD.  Accessed 16 February 2017. Glogau, Richard MD et. al.  "Results of a Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Study to Evaluate the Efficacy and Safety of a Botulinum Toxin Type A Topical Gel for the Treatment of Moderate-to-Severe Lateral Canthal Lines."
  Journal of Drugs in Dermatology.  January 2012. Humbert, PG et al.  "Topical Ascorbic Acid on Photoaged Skin. Clinical, Topographical And Ultrastructural Evaluation: Double-Blind Study Vs. Placebo."
  Experimental Dermatology.  June 2003. Krau, Ary MD.  "Is There a Topical Cream for Lifting the Breasts?"
  Ary Krau MD.  22 January 2016. Magee, Elaine.  "10 Nutrient-Rich Super Foods."
  WebMD.  Accessed 16 February 2017. University of Maryland Medical Center (UMMC).   "Skin Wrinkles and Blemishes."
  Updated 18 December 2012. International Olive Council.  "The Antioxidant Properties Of The Olive Oil."
    Accessed 16 February 2017. Claim:  In 2006, U.S. Senator Barack Obama spoke out against raising the U.S. government debt limit.   Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July 2011]   'The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the US Government can not pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies. Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here." Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.'    Origins:  In 2006, while serving his first term as a freshman U.S. senator from Illinois, Barack Obama made the remarks attributed to him above during discussion in the U.S. Senate prior to the call for votes on raising the debt limit. The full text of his remarks in the Senate on 16 March 2006 are:     The fact that we are here today to debate raising America's debt limit is a sign of leadership failure. It is a sign that the U.S. Government can't pay its own bills. It is a sign that we now depend on ongoing financial assistance from foreign countries to finance our Government's reckless fiscal policies.    Over the past 5 years, our federal debt has increased by $3.5 trillion to $8.6 trillion. That is "trillion" with a "T." That is money that we have borrowed from the Social Security trust fund, borrowed from China and Japan, borrowed from American taxpayers. And over the next 5 years, between now and 2011, the President's budget will increase the debt by almost another $3.5 trillion.    Numbers that large are sometimes hard to understand. Some people may wonder why they matter. Here is why: This year, the Federal Government will spend $220 billion on interest. That is more money to pay interest on our national debt than we'll spend on Medicaid and the State Children's Health Insurance Program. That is more money to pay interest on our debt this year than we will spend on education, homeland security, transportation, and veterans benefits combined. It is more money in one year than we are likely to spend to rebuild the devastated gulf coast in a way that honors the best of America.    And the cost of our debt is one of the fastest growing expenses in the Federal budget. This rising debt is a hidden domestic enemy, robbing our cities and States of critical investments in infrastructure like    bridges, ports, and levees; robbing our families and our children of critical investments in education and health care reform; robbing our seniors of the retirement and health security they have counted on. Every dollar we pay in interest is a dollar that is not going to investment in America's priorities. Instead, interest payments are a significant tax on all Americans  a debt tax that Washington doesn't want to talk about. If Washington were serious about honest tax relief in this country, we would see an effort to reduce our national debt by returning to responsible fiscal policies.    But we are not doing that. Despite repeated efforts by Senators Conrad and Feingold, the Senate continues to reject a return to thecommonsense Pay-go rules that used to apply. Previously, Pay-go rules applied both to increases in mandatory spending and to tax cuts. The Senate had to abide by the commonsense budgeting principle of balancing expenses and revenues. Unfortunately, the principle was abandoned, and now the demands of budget discipline apply only to spending. As a result, tax breaks have not been paid for by reductions in Federal spending, and thus the only way to pay for them has been to increase our deficit to historically high levels and borrow more and more money. Now we have to pay for those tax breaks plus the cost of borrowing for them. Instead of reducing the deficit, as some people claimed, the fiscal policies of this administration and its allies in Congress will add more than $600 million in debt for each of the next 5 years. That is why I will once again cosponsor the Pay-go amendment and continue to hope that my colleagues will return to a smart rule that has worked in the past and can work again.    Our debt also matters internationally. My friend, the ranking member of the Senate Budget Committee, likes to remind us that it took 42 Presidents 224 years to run up only $1 trillion of foreign-held debt. This administration did more than that in just 5 years. Now, there is nothing wrong with borrowing from foreign countries. But we must remember that the more we depend on foreign nations to lend us money, the more our economic security is tied to the whims of foreign leaders whose interests might not be aligned with ours.    Increasing America's debt weakens us domestically and internationally. Leadership means that "the buck stops here.'' Instead, Washington is shifting the burden of bad choices today onto the backs of our children and grandchildren. America has a debt problem and a failure of leadership. Americans deserve better.    I therefore intend to oppose the effort to increase America's debt limit.    The shortened quote now attributed to him is a verbatim capture of the opening and closing paragraphs of his remarks of 16 March 2006. (The Senate vote held later that day on a resolution to increase the debt limitpassed by a 52-48 margin, with Senator Obama voting against it.) passed President Obama has undergone a change of position regarding raising the debt limit. In a 15 April 2011 Good Morning America interview, President Obama said this of his reasons for doing so:     Last updated:  7 October 2013    Congressional Record.  "Remarks by Sen. Barack Obama."    16 March 2006.   Farley, Robert.  "Obama Says Reagan Raised Debt Ceiling 18 Times; George W. Bush 7 Times."    St. Petersburg Times.  26 July 2011.   Stephanopoulos, George.  "President Obama One-on-One."    Good Morning America.  15 April 2011.   Werner, Erica.  "WH: Obama Regrets Vote Against Raising Debt Limit."    Associated Press.  11 April 2011. Snopes is still fighting an infodemic of rumors and misinformation surrounding the COVID-19 pandemic, and you can help. Find out what we've learned and how to inoculate yourself against COVID-19 misinformation. Read the latest fact checks about the vaccines. Submit any questionable rumors and advice you encounter. Become a Founding Member to help us hire more fact-checkers. And, please, follow the CDC or WHO for guidance on protecting your community from the disease.  fighting Find out Read Submit Become a Founding Member CDC WHO As the COVID-19 coronavirus disease pandemic of March 2020 threatened to shut down businesses across America for an extended period of time, the U.S. government faced the difficult task of deciding which industries should be provided economic assistance to keep them afloat for the duration. Public sentiment in some quarters was strongly against government bailouts for businesses such as airlines and cruise companies, on the grounds that over the last several years many of the major operators had spent billions of dollars in profits buying up their own stock rather than paying down their debts. In USA Today, John M. Griffin and James M. Griffin wrote: strongly against Start with the airlines. Rather than using their profits from the past five years to pay off debts and save for a rainy day, the big four  American, United, Delta and Southwest  instead grew their combined liabilities to $166 billion, all while spending $39 billion on share repurchases. That number, which is only from the big four, is almost 80% of what theyre asking for now from U.S. taxpayers. Similarly, the three largest Cruise companies -- Carnival, Norwegian, and Royal Caribbean -- have liabilities of $47.5 billion and engaged in share repurchases of $8 billion. Had these companies paid down liabilities instead of using stock repurchases to bid up their stock prices, they would have been far better prepared to weather this emergency. Of course, higher share prices made their stock options more valuable. This allowed top airlines executives to pay themselves $666 million in compensation over the five-year period. The top cruise executives managed to haul in $448 million. Now, taxpayers are unwillingly being called upon to bail out their profligate behavior. A widely circulated meme on social media offered another reason why cruise lines were supposedly unworthy of government bailouts -- because although they might be headquartered in the U.S., their ships were foreign-flagged in order to put them out of reach of U.S. law:  That nearly every major cruise line registers their ships somewhere outside the U.S. is hardly a disputable point. As a 2011 news report noted, only a single major cruise ship at the time was U.S.-flagged: news report [O]nly one major cruise ship -- NCL America's Pride of America -- is registered in the United States, according to data from CyberCruises.com. Most of the big boats fly Bahamian flags, but other popular registries include Panama, Bermuda, Italy, Malta and the Netherlands. In fact, according to Cruise Lines International Association, 90% of commercial vessels calling on U.S. ports fly foreign flags. The three cruise lines called out by name in the meme -- Disney, Celebrity, and Carnival -- do indeed engage in this practice. It's not difficult to verify that Disney cruise ships are registered in the Bahamas, Celebrity ships in Malta, and Carnival ships in Panama. Of course, the cruise industry and their critics offer differing reasons for why cruise ships are flagged in countries other than the U.S., with the former asserting that: Bahamas Malta Panama reasons CLIA [Cruise Lines International Association] maintains there are reasons for such policies: "There are many factors that determine where a cruise ship -- or for that matter, any maritime vessel -- is flagged. Those determinations are made by individual cruise lines and other ship operators based on varying factors including the capabilities of the flag to deliver the services needed; representation and reputation of the flag in the international shipping community; the performance of the flag state, which dictates how a ship is prioritized by port states; the pool of seafarers able to meet the needs of the flag; and the flag's fees/charges and taxes," the association said by e-mail. This can be viewed as a robust free-market debate. Some maintain burdensome U.S. regulations have forced cruise operators to plant their flags elsewhere, while others say these corporations are seeking to attract American dollars while skirting American safety and consumer protection laws. On the other hand, an academic paper by Caitlin E. Burke of the University of Florida about "Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships" made no bones of observing that reflagging of ships had long been used as a means of avoiding U.S. federal taxes, labor and safety laws, environmental laws, lawsuits, criminal investigations, and other regulations: paper Aside from the majority revenue generated by U.S. passengers, cruise lines are independent of the U.S. economy. Even though nearly 75 percent of passengers are U.S. citizens, cruise line corporations and their ships are not traditionally American-owned or registered ... (Tomlinson, 2007) Cruise line companies are not concerned about increasing minimum wage, rising insurance premiums, or higher corporate taxes. Cruise lines escape federal taxes and labor laws by registering their corporations and vessels in foreign countries [such as] Panama, Liberia, and the Bahamas. In fact, employees of cruise lines are often mistreated due to lackadaisical labor laws. Worst of all, employees will find little to no recourse pursuing litigation. Likewise, a U.S. citizen passenger faces the same predicament. A vessels country of registration is commonly referred to as the "flag of convenience" (FOC). Flagging a ship under a foreign flag for the convenience of the cruise line is nothing new, nor is it rare. The majority of cruise ships today are registered to Panama, Liberia, or the Bahamas. It is important to pay close attention as many vessels within the same fleet are often registered to different countries. Carnival Corporation, for example, has flagged their cruise vessel Celebration under Panama and Destiny under the Bahamas. Cruise lines often avoid drawing attention to the FOC of by using the term "headquartered in Miami, Florida." It is important to understand that while the majority of these cruise lines have their headquarters in Miami, they are not registered in the U.S. Thus, U.S. laws do not apply and passengers are at the mercy of maritime law. That the practice of ship-reflagging is common and regular is undeniable. Whether cruise lines headquartered in the U.S. but operating ships registered in foreign countries "deserve" government bailouts in a time of pandemic is a subjective issue with no definitive answer, but certainly some critics have argued that they do not: critics Even in a crisis, companies with prudent balance sheets will survive and in time, thrive. Despite what politicians might tell you, the airplanes and ships of imprudent companies are physical property that will not suddenly disappear. They will fly or sail again under the same or different name, but hopefully with cheaper prices, better service and different executives. Like a college student sleeping off a hangover, a crisis is a time to sober up by removing debt from the system. Its not time for another drink. McGee, Bill.  "What Every Cruiser Should Know Before They Book."
  USA Today.  26 April 2011. McGee, Bill.  "Why Are Cruise Ships Registered in Foreign Countries?"
  USA Today.  11 December 2012. van Doorn, Philip.  "Airlines and Boeing Want a Bailout  But Look How Much Theyve Spent on Stock Buybacks."
  MarketWatch.  22 March 2020. Griffin, John M. and James M. Griffin.  "Coronavirus Bailout for Airlines and Cruise lines Is Socialism for the Undeserving Rich."
  USA Today.  20 March 2020. Burke, Caitlin E.  "A Qualitative Study of Victimization and Legal Issues Relevant to Cruise Ships."
  Accessed 23 March 2020. In mid-August 2020, Snopes readers inquired about a meme circulating on Facebook that claimed money given to AARP (formerly American Association of Retired Persons), an advocacy organization that lobbies on behalf of retired Americans, goes "directly" to the Democratic party.   It's unclear what exactly is meant by the phrase, "what you pay AARP." The organization has an estimated 38 million members, all of whom typically pay annual dues at $16 per year. As a 501(c)4 tax-exempt organization, it also accepts charitable donations. estimated dues at tax-exempt accepts Either way, any money paid to AARP through membership dues or donations does not go "directly" to the Democratic party. The AARP lobbies the government on behalf of causes that affect people aged 50 and older. Those activities may include taking a stand on health care and Social Security. stand Social Security In terms of candidates and political parties, however, AARP's official position is that it is non-partisan. The organization states it "does not support, endorse or contribute to political candidates or parties." states Instead, per AARP, the organization's role in terms of election politics is "connecting voters to information about where the candidates stand on issues most important to them including the future of Social Security and other critical issues related to financial security, health and well-being." We checked the AARP's federal campaign finance data using the website Open Secrets, a project operated by the government accountability organization The Center for Responsive Politics. We found no contributions to any political candidates or parties, Democratic or otherwise, from AARP, the organization. However, contributions from individuals who work for AARP is another matter. Open Secrets "AARP does not have any record of direct contributions to political parties or candidates based on my review of federal campaign finance and tax filings covering recent years, but AARPs officers [executives] and employees can still make political donations in a personal capacity, and contributions from donors listing AARP as their employer in Federal Election Commission records have primarily gone to Democratic candidates in recent years," said Anna Massoglia, a researcher for The Center for Responsive Politics. AARP policy prohibits employees or officers from engaging in any personal political activity using AARP resources or during work hours. policy According to campaign finance data tracked by Open Secrets, individual donors associated with AARP made a total of $96,381 in political contributions as of this writing in the 2020 federal election cycle, the majority (87.45%) of those donations going to Democratic candidates. total majority Massoglia said that as a 501(c)4 organization, the AARP is allowed under U.S. tax code to engage in some political campaign activity. But their activities have been issue-oriented and bipartisan. For example, a 2018 AARP ad praised U.S. President Donald Trump on drug pricing policy. The organization has also supported upholding the Affordable Care Act, the landmark health care law signed by Trump's Democratic predecessor, President Barack Obama. praised supported AARP spokesperson Jason Young told us by phone that the organization, as a 501(c)4 non-profit, is prohibited by law from making political contributions. "Not only does AARP not make donations of this sort, we never have and we don't have a PAC," Young added. Young said that although some AARP employees have made political contributions in a personal capacity, the sum of donations is relatively small. "It's fair to say we are largely absent form this type of political engagement, and that's because AARP as an organization is focused on policy, not politics," Young stated. Although it's true that individuals who work for AARP have donated primarily to Democratic candidates, individual donations are not the same as contributions by an organization. Because AARP as an organization has not contributed to the Democratic party or its candidates, we rate this claim,  Hahn, Steve.  "Voter and Candidate Reminder: AARP Is Strictly Non-Partisan."
  AARP.  26 August 2016. AARP.org. "How Much Does AARP Membership Cost?"
  Accessed 18 August 2020. AARP.org.  "IRS Definition."
  3 March 2011. AARP. org.  "AARP Policy on Personal Political Activity."
  Accessed 19 August 2020. Bunis, Dena."AARP Urges Federal Appeals Court to Preserve the ACA."
  1 April 2019. Updated to include comments from AARP spokesperson Jason Young. The photograph displayed above is a Christmas-season picture of graves at Arlington National Cemetery, the final resting place of men and women who served the United States in the military and in the government. Every December since 1992, volunteers have laid wreaths donated by the Worcester Wreath Company of Harrington, Maine, at the headstones of thousands of America's honored dead: Arlington Example:  [Collected via e-mail, November 2005] I had never heard of this. I have only visited in the summer months. I wonder why the press hasn't enlightened the public about it? Arlington National Cemetery  Rest easy, sleep well my brothers.Know the line has held, your job is done.Rest easy, sleep well.Others have taken up where you fell, the line has held.Peace, peace, and farewell...  Readers may be interested to know that these wreaths  some 5,000  are donated by the Worcester Wreath Co. of Harrington, Maine. The owner, Merrill Worcester, not only provides the wreaths, but covers the trucking expense as well. He's done this since 1992. A wonderful guy. Also, most years, groups of Maine school kids combine an educational trip to DC with this event to help out. Making this even more remarkable is the fact that Harrington is in one the poorest parts of the state. Morrill Worcester initially brought 4,000 surplus wreaths from the holiday decoration company he owns to adorn gravesites at Arlington in 1992. Every year since then he has set aside several thousand wreaths especially for that purpose, driving to Arlington in December with a trailer full of decorations and dozens of volunteers to distribute them throughout the cemetery. As Mr. Worcester told an Air Force reporter in 2005: We couldn't do anything in this country if it wasn't for the people who gave their lives to protect us. It's a great honor to be able to come here and pay our respects.That first year, there were just a few of us, and it took us five or six hours to get them placed. This year, we had extra help and got done in about an hour. One question we're commonly asked is how the Arlington Wreath Project determines where to place their wreaths, since Arlington National Cemetery encompasses many more graves than the number of wreaths distributed each year. Major Wayne Merritt, a co-director of the Project, told us that the director of the cemetery selects the location for each year's wreath-laying, and the Project's plan is to cover all the areas of the park over a number of years. The answer to another common question is provided in Wreaths Across America's FAQ: "Prior to the wreath-laying ceremonies, cemetery administrative personnel give participants specific instructions regarding placement of wreaths. In most state/national cemeteries, participants are instructed to place wreaths only on graves bearing the Christian cross or nondenominational graves." FAQ In 2007, the Worcester family, along with veterans and other groups and individuals who had helped with their annual Christmas wreath ceremony in Arlington, formed Wreaths Across America, a non-profit organization, to continue and expand the effort to place memorial wreaths at more than 230 State and National Cemeteries and Veterans Monuments across the United States. This project receives no government funding, with the cost of the program being paid for by individual wreath sponsors and corporate donors. Wreaths Across America On 10 December 2011, 15,000 volunteers laid 90,000 wreaths on headstones at Arlington National Cemetery. Photographs of the 2011 wreath-laying ceremony can be viewed on the Washington Post web site. Washington Post The clip displayed below is a seven-minute video of past wreath-laying ceremonies put together by Worcester Wreath to show what the Arlington Wreath Project and Wreaths Across America is all about:  Alcindor, Yamiche.  Thousands of Wreath-Layers Carry Out Arlington Tradition.
 The Washington Post.  13 December 2009. Buzanowski, J. G.  Airmen, Civilians Lay Wreaths at Arlington.
 Air Force Print News. 19 December 2005. Crudele, Bethany.  Volunteers Lay Wreaths at Arlington in Holiday Tribute to Fallen Veterans.
 CNN.  12 December 2009. Salas, Randy.  Web Search: Wreaths for the Fallen.
 [Minneapolis] Star Tribune. 9 November 2006. This legend has circulated in Great Britain at least since 1972. Author Douglas Adams tells the "packet of biscuits" tale in his 1984 novel So Long, and Thanks for All the Fish. He has since recounted it on numerous occasions, claiming it happened to him in 1976 at a station in Cambridge. His claim is doubted by many who point out the self-same tale was around years prior to that, but it is not impossible for events in real life to mimic those of lore. (Indeed, the actual folkloric term for such an event is ostension.) In any case, whether the incident happened to him or not, it is clear the legend did not begin with him: ostension Examples: [Brunvand, 1986] An elderly woman, traveling by bus, had a layover during her journey. She purchased a package of Oreo cookies from a vending machine in the bus terminal and located a table. She placed her cookies on the table, sat down, and proceeded to read her newspaper She was joined by a young man, who, to her surprise, opened the package of Oreo cookies and began to eat them. The woman, saying nothing, but giving him an icy stare, grabbed a cookie. The young man, with a funny look on his face, ate another cookie. The woman again glared and grabbed another cookie. The young man finished the third cookie and offered the last to the woman. Completely appalled, she grabbed the cookie and the young man left. Outraged, the woman threw down her paper only to find her unopened Oreos on the table in front of her.  [Collected on the Internet, 1994] A friend of my aunt was going shopping at the mall, and stopped in a snack bar to rest her feet. She bought a Kit Kat bar, a candy bar which breaks into several pieces. The place was crowded, so the friend was forced to share a table with a meek-looking gentleman. (That's just the way some malls are, I guess.) The expected business happened with the two of them sharing the Kit Kat, but since the Kit Kat had an odd number of pieces, she made sure she got the last one. The man got up without saying a word, went over to the counter and bought a couple of donuts. The friend was working herself into a rage because this guy had eaten her Kit Kat. She imagined that he had bought two donuts to give one to her in apology, and so you can imagine how she got even more angry when he had the gall to go sit by himself at a table far away from her. So, in the strength of her fury, she stalked over to his table, picked up one of the donuts, took a BIG CHOMP out of it, and set it back in front of him. Then she glared at him, said "And a VERY GOOD DAY to you, too!" and stormed out. She got to her car, opened up the purse to get her keys, and you know the rest. [Ann Landers, 1997] A Ferry Story My aunt and uncle own a business in Kamloops, B.C. Here is a true story that happened to one of the women in their office: The woman was taking the car ferry from Victoria to Vancouver. She sat on the deck. Beside her in an empty chair were her newspaper and her chocolate bar. A man sat next to the little pile. He picked up the chocolate bar, ate it, picked up the newspaper, read some of it, threw the candy bar wrapper away, tucked the newspaper under his arm and then walked off. The woman was too shocked to say anything. Having nothing to read, eat or munch on, she decided to go to the cafeteria. There, at a table, sat the man, flipping the pages of the newspaper with one hand, holding a submarine sandwich in the other. Still angry, the woman strode over to him, grabbed the sandwich out of his hand, took a big bite and then put the sandwich back in his hand. She marched off, saying nothing and not looking back. She then decided to go to her car. On the passenger seat were her newspaper and her chocolate bar. She had never taken them out of the car! Variations: Numerous stories about unwitting thieves abound in the realm of contemporary lore, with the "victim turned thief" motif appearing in such tales since the early 1900s. (Visit our Pocket(ed) Watch, Gun-Toting Grannies, and Jogger's Billfold pages for other legends of this type.) Pocket(ed) Watch Gun-Toting Grannies Jogger's Billfold As folklorist Jan Harold Brunvand put it, "All variations on the theme of unwitting theft portray a plausible situation in which we ourselves might act in such an uncharacteristic threatening manner because of a simple misunderstanding." In this legend, the "plausible situation" impels a woman one presumes would not normally make a spectacle of herself to angrily glare at a stranger, screech at him, lecture him, or even defiantly grab a food item she knows is his and tear a bite out of it. Because of the way the characters are presented (the woman exudes a faintly aristocratic aura while the man is described as a leather-clad punk, a foreigner, or an insolent-appearing young person), the woman's social lapse is more glaring. We forgive her outburst at the time ... but afterwards have a chance to reflect on how she handled the situation and conclude there had to have been a better way. Her lapse and the awareness of how she must have appeared to others serves as a caution against our taking similar action in any potentially confrontational encounter that occurs in public. We might not always have all of the facts we think we do. Moreover, even if we do have all the facts, we're going to look like a right idiot to anyone looking on. Sightings: Both the 1990 film The Lunch Date and the 1989 film Boeuf Bourgignon make use of this legend. In both, a well-dressed white woman goes off to fetch silverware and returns to find a Black man eating her lunch. Only after she shares her dinner with the stranger (at one point he fetches coffee for the two of them) and the man leaves does she notice her own meal sitting on another table. The 2010 Ian McEwan novel Solar contains an interesting sighting of the legend, where it is both related as a true story undergone by the book's protagonist and afterwards challenged by a folklorist he encounters on its basis as an urban legend of long standing. Denton. Lisa.  Chewing Gum Keeps the Hearing Aids In.
 The Chattanooga Times. 30 July 1997  (p. C1).  Kaelber, Randy.  The Biscuit Bullet: Is It My Fault?
 FOAFTale News. June 1996  (p. 8). Kreck, Dick.  A Biscuit with Her Name on It.
 The Denver Post. 6 April 1996  (p. D8). McEwan, Ian. Solar.
  Toronto: Alfred A. Knopf, 2010.  ISBN 978-0-385-53341-6. 
  (pp. 117-8, 119, 121-7, 154-5, 157-8, 179-80). Owens, Gene.  Doughboy Gets Around.
 [Greensboro] News & Record. 11 July 1995  (Food; p. A7). Rose, Allen.  Story of Biscuit Dough Explodes in My Face.
 The Orlando Sentinel. 31 May 1996  (p. D1). Rose, Allen.  Biscuit Dough Makes Impact on Shopper.
 The Orlando Sentinel. 30 May 1996  (p. D1). Sandstrom, Karen.  Joke Telling Done Well Gives Audience More Than Laughs.
 The Plain Dealer. 19 June 1994  (p. B5). Setencich, Eli.  City Shoots First, Asks Questions Later.
 The Fresno Bee. 22 January 1996  (p. B1). Truly, Pat.  The Unthinkable Is Becoming Less So Every Day.
 The [Cleveland] Plain Dealer. 19 January 1994  (p. B5). Venable, Sam.  Highway Shooting Incident Turned Out to Be Poppin Fresh.
 The Knoxville News-Sentinel. 19 April 1998. Viets, Elaine.  The Half-Baked Biscuit Bullet Story Wont Die.
 Pittsburgh Post-Gazette. 13 December 1995  (Food; p. 3). Wikipedia.  "Ostensive Definition; Ostension in Folklore."
  Accessed 14 November 2018. Claim:  Barack Obama filed a lawsuit to require banks to "make loans to poor people." false Example:  [Collected via e-mail, September 2008] In 1994, a class-action lawsuit was filed against CitiBank, demanding that loans be made to poor people, and others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back. The basis of the lawsuit was the 14th Amendment, which requires 'fair and equal' treatment for all citizens. The legal theory was that failing to loan money to poor/indigent/unemployed people was, on it's face, a discriminatory act by lending institutions. Thousands of loans were processed, and of course many went into default, in part explaining why we're in the financial mess we're in. Now, it's easy for some people to point the finger of blame at Pres. Geo. Bush for this crisis, because he's sitting in the hot seat. What many people don't know is the suit was filed during the Clinton Administration. The lawyer filing the suit was none other than: Barak Hussein Obama. Origins:  This item seeks to dump much of the blame for America's current economic woes on Barack Obama by claiming that as a young lawyer, Obama filed a lawsuit requiring financial institutions to lend money to"poor people" and "others who could not show proof that they could pay the money back."  Although there is a (very) vague element of fact underneath this politicking, the piece quoted above is woefully wrong in all its particulars. The 1994 case of Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank had nothing to do with requiring lenders to do business with people "who could not show proof that they could pay the money  Buycks-Roberson v. Citibank Fed. Sav. Bank back."  The case was a class-action lawsuit against Citibank Federal Savings initiated by a black Chicago woman, Selma Buycks-Roberson, who claimed she was unfairly denied a mortgage based on her race.  The lawsuit sought to end the practice of redlining, a discriminatory practice by which banks, insurance companies, and other business institutions refuse or limit loans, mortgages, insurance, etc., based solely on the geographic area in which the applicant lives (a practice that commonly excludes minorities in inner-city neighborhoods, regardless of their income or ability to pay).  Specifically, the lawsuit charged that Citibank "rejected loan applications of minority applicants while approving loan applications filed by white applicants with similar financial characteristics and credit histories."  The case was eventually settled out of court, with some class members receiving cash payments and Citibank agreeing to help ease the way for low- and moderate-income people to apply for mortgages. redlining Although Barack Obama was involved with the Buycks-Roberson case, he did not file the lawsuit, nor was he the lead attorney in the matter.  He was a junior member of an eight-lawyer team that worked on the case: Obama admits he played a mostly behind-the-scenes role at his law firm, Miner Barnhill & Galland. He researched the law, drafted motions, prepared for depositions and did other less glamorous work during his three years full-time and eight years "of counsel" to the firm.  "He wrote lots of substantial memos, but he didn't try any cases," said Judson Miner, a partner in the firm who was Obama's boss. Obama represented Calvin Roberson in a 1994 lawsuit against Citibank, charging the bank systematically denied mortgages to African-American applicants and others from minority neighborhoods. "I don't recall him ever standing up and giving an impassioned speech  it was a lot of behind-the-scenes stuff," said Fay Clayton, the lead lawyer on the case. "He was the very junior lawyer in that case," said attorney Robert Kriss. "He had just graduated from law school. I don't recall him being in court at any time I was there. I was the lead lawyer for Citibank and he was not very visible to me." Kriss, Clayton and every other co-counsel and opposing counsel interviewed for this story praised Obama's legal ability, temperament and everything about his courtroom demeanor, even though, they agree, he didn't say much in the courtroom.  On Feb. 23, 1995, Obama billed 2 hours and 50 minutes for an appearance before Judge Ruben Castillo on behalf of his client, and also for reviewing some documents in advance of a deposition. That cost Citibank  which ultimately had to pay the winning side's fees  $467 at Obama's hourly rate of $165. Miner commanded the higher rate of $285 an hour. During his appearance before the judge, Obama said he would need more time to file a response to a motion, and the judge agreed. That was all Obama said during the half-hour hearing. His final bill on the case was 138 hours, or $23,000. Last updated:  5 September 2012    Associated Press.  "Some Cases Obama Worked on in His Career as an Attorney."   20 February 2007. On 5 September 2017, the web site Pagez.com published an article claiming that the cast of the hit NBC show The Officewould return for a new season in 2018: Pagez.com CONFIRMED: The Office US is returning in 2018! Last week we heard the news that NBC bosses have given writers the go ahead to create a new season of The Office US. Today, we hear the news that writer, Mindy Kaling is ready to write.  This week has been full of Office news ever since star Jenna Fisher posted an old un-shot episode script on Instagram. Calling out the crew to get back together and shoot!    This article was based on two other posts, an April Fool's Day joke on Medium.com and an Instagram post from actress Jenna Fischer, neither of which "confirmed" that the cast of The Office would reunite for a new season of the hit NBC show. Fischer's Instagram post, for instance, was posted in February 2017, not "this week" as alleged by this September 2017 article. Although Fischer's idea stirred up some fan interest in a reunion, neither NBC nor the show's creators had announced plans at that time to create new episodes of the program. Instagram The rest of the Pagez.com article was based on an April Fool's Day Joke published on Medium.com. In fact, the author of the Pagez article plagiarized an entire paragraph from the joke article on Medium. Here's a comparison of text from the joke article on Medium (left) and the fake news article on Pagez (right): Medium.c om   Pagez.com later retracted their claim: retracted The other day we reported that The Office US would be hitting our screens again in 2018. Well, we were wrong. We all make mistakes and it seems that we got fooled by an April Fools joke from earlier this year. After our writers read the original article they got so excited they just had to tell everyone. They went ahead and published the story. So blame them. Not me.  However, there is a real (albeit slight) possibility that NBC could reboot the hit series. NBC Entertainment chairman Bob Greenblatt told Deadline in August 2017 that the network frequently talks about bringing back The Office (with a different cast), but added that a new season was not currently in the works: Deadline There had been a lot of chatter the past few weeks about NBC potentially bringing back Emmy-winning comedy The Office, with Greg Daniels  who developed and ran the U.S. version of the British series  at the helm and possibly a new cast. While Id heard some optimism around town that a new Office may be in the offing, NBC Entertainment chairman Bob Greenblatt did not indicate that a deal is in the works. We often talk about The Office, Ive talked to Greg four times over the past few years. Its always, maybe some day but not now, Greenblatt said in an interview with Deadline during NBCs portion of the TCA press tour. There is certainly an open invitation but we dont have anything happening right now. If he wants to do it, I would do it. Rumors of an Office revival kicked in again in December 2017, when TVLine reported (without confirmation from NBC) that plans were in the works for a "continuation" of the series: NBC is getting ready to put pen to paper on a revival of The Office. Sources confirm to TVLine exclusively that the Peacock network is eyeing a continuation of the beloved workplace comedy for the 2018-2019 season. The revival would once again be set at Dunder Mifflins Scranton, PA., branch, and feature a mix of new and old cast members. Steve Carell, who starred as the branchs regional manager, Michael Scott, for seven of the comedys nine seasons, will not be involved in the new series. The search for a new RM/boss is said to be already underway.  NBC declined to comment on or confirm any details of this story. Andreeva, Nellie.  "NBC Boss Revival Wish List: The Office, 30 Rock, The West Wing & ER"
  Deadline.  3 August 2017. Ausiello, Michael.  "The Office Revival Eyed at NBC for 2018-2019 Season."
  TVLine.  18 December 2017. Claim: Edible Arrangements funds the terrorist organization Hamas. UNDETERMINED Example:   [Collected via Facebook, July 2014] A friend posted an "article" about Edible Arrangements supporting Hamas: "After you see what Edible Arrangments did for Hamas, you'll never buy from them AGAIN."  Being suspicious, I did a search and found a number of articles, all from late 2012, and all from questionable "news" sources.   Origins:  Edible Arrangements International is a U.S.-based business that specializes in selling "fruit bouquets," fruit baskets designed like floral arrangements.  As of 2014, the company was a 1,200-store chain with outlets in 14 countries, including the United States, Canada, Puerto Rico, the United Arab Emirates, Saudi Arabia, Kuwait, Qatar, Bahrain, Italy, Turkey, Hong Kong, Oman, India and China. Since at least as far back as 2012, rumors have circulated claiming that brothers Tariq and Kamran Farid, who founded the company, are "devout Pakistani Muslims" who have, through their Tariq Farid Foundation, donated money to organizations linked with Hamas, a Palestinian Islamic fundamentalist movement engaged in armed resistance and terrorism against Israel: rumors Tariq Farid Foundation Hamas Tariq Farid is the CEO of Edible Arrangements, which he started with his brother, Kamran Farid. Not only are they devout Pakistani Muslims, but they are major donors and fundraisers for American mosques, Islamic schools, and similar enterprises in Pakistan. Recent tax returns of their Farid Foundation, to which they and Edible Arrangements are major contributors, show that their foundation gives tens of thousands of dollars to extremist Islamic schools and mosques in America and to Islamic Relief, the HAMAS/Al-Qaeda/Muslim Brotherhood "charity" which sends tens of millions of dollars to finance jihad around the world. The Anti-Defamation League (whose stated mission is to "stop the defamation of the Jewish people and to secure justice and fair treatment for all citizens alike") said of such rumors back in 2012 that: Anti-Defamation League We have received several such inquiries regarding recent allegations by Debbie Schlussel in an article critical of the owners of Edible Arrangements, which sells fruit baskets and the like. Schlussel claims that the owners of Edible Arrangements are funding Palestinian terror organizations, including Hamas, through their Farid Foundation. In our judgment, Schlussel's allegations lack context and nuance and she does not offer any clear evidence to support them. Even if the Farid Foundation has provided funding for some of the American Muslim groups she references, we believe it is an unsupported stretch to conclude that the Foundation or Edible Arrangements is funding Hamas. The ADL disclaimed these rumors again in August 2014: disclaimed A widely circulated rumor suggests that the owners of Edible Arrangements, a company that sells fruit baskets through a series of privately owned franchises across the country, are funding Hamas through a charitable foundation they support. Several ideologically motivated online sites are urging consumers to boycott the company due to their ties to terrorism." In fact, there is absolutely no truth to these unfounded assertions. While the Farid Foundation has provided funding to various organization in the U.S. and abroad, there is no evidence to suggest that any of those funds have been used to support terrorism.  Moreover, the company has clearly and unequivocally denounced terrorism, including those forms of terror used by Hamas. It should also be noted that the company's franchise owners come from a variety of religious backgrounds; some are Jewish, including the companys current president. We do note that in June 2014 Islamic Relief WorldWide (IRW) was banned from operating in Israel due to that country's belief that IRW "funnels cash to Hamas": Defense Minister Moshe Ya'alon [has] signed a decree banning Islamic Relief Worldwide from operating in Israel. Israel believes IRW, which markets itself as a charitable agency that solicits donations from all over the world, funnels cash to Hamas. Yaalons ban was decided upon after the Israel Security Agency (Shin Bet), the coordinator for government activities in the territories, and legal authorities provided incriminating information against IRW.  The organization has representatives worldwide, including Australia, the United States, and Britain, where it is headquartered. Some of their local branches in Gaza, Judea, and Samaria are run by Hamas operatives.  Ya'alon's decree makes it illegal for IRW to function anywhere in Israel, Judea, and Samaria. It will also be forbidden from transferring funds to any destination in Judea and Samaria.  "[The IRW] is another source of funds for Hamas, and we have no intention of allowing it to operate and assist terrorist activity against Israel," Ya'alon said. "This is another in a series of steps that we are taking against Hamas in Judea and Samaria and the pressure we are applying, the goal of which is to harm the organizations leadership and rank-and-file as well as its civilian infrastructure. These serve as the foundation from which Hamas operates among the local population." In March 2014, Blue MauMau reported on a sexual and religious harassment lawsuit against Edible Arrangements and founder Tariq Farid which referenced charitable organizations that the Farids allegedly support: reported Farid and his brother, Kamran Farid (Edible Arrangements' Chief Operating Officer), at all relevant times hereto have been the two trustees of a foundation called the Farid Foundation, operated out of the same location as Edible Arrangements. Farid Foundation makes significant contributions to Islamic causes and organizations,  including the Farid Foundation Pakistan; the Salma K. Farid Academy; Islamic Circle of North America Relief; the Muslim Coalition of Connecticut; the Inner-City Muslim Action Network; the Wallingford Islamic Center; Masjid AI-Islam; and the Islamic Association of Southern Connecticut. The funding for these donations is derived in large part from donations by Farid and his brother, and by Edible Arrangements and its affiliated entities. One of those organizations, the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA) supposedly has financial ties to Hamas, but the evidence presented for that claim only references web links from the ICNA web site to Hamas and similar groups, not any direct financial ties: ICNA evidence Open support for terrorist causes was available on the websites of regional ICNA branches, even after 9/11. As late as November 2002, the ICNA Southeast Zone website linked to the websites of Hamas, Hizballah, and terrorist organizations fighting in Chechnya, Afghanistan, and the Pakistani-Indian disputed region of Kashmir. Among its short list of recommended Islamic charities was the Islamic Society in Gaza, which openly touted its connections to Hamas. The day after the Blue MauMau article was published, Tariq Farid's legal representatives issued a letter challenging the truthfulness of its implications, demanding its retraction, and asserting, among other things, that Farid's foundation only donation to ICNA was made "to a special fund of the ICNA called 'ICNA Relief USA', an organization in New York City, which, among other things, helps women with temporary housing: letter This letter addresses a recent article regarding my clients, Tariq Farid and the Farid Foundation, that was written by Paul Steinberg under the pseudonym "Corbin Williston," and published on your website, Blue MauMau. The article is false and defamatory of Mr. Farid and the Farid Foundation, and we demand an inunediate and complete retraction. We also demand that the publication be immediately removed from all websites under your control.  The article has been deliberately written to falsely accuse Mr. Farid and the Farid Foundation of supporting the illegal acts of alleged terrorist organizations and the activities of alleged war criminals. Moreover, the article is written so that a reasonable reader would believe  that Edible Arrangements, the well-known business of which Mr. Farid is founder and CEO, also supports these alleged acts of terrorism. These statements, and the entire message of the article, are patently and outrageously false. Indeed, the author and publisher of these falsehoods could only have acted with actual malice and reckless disregard for the truth. The article asserts that Mr. Farid and the Farid Foundation supports terrorist activities overseas through the Farid Foundation's donations to the Islamic Circle of North America (ICNA). In fact, the Farid Foundation's only contribution was to a special fund of the ICNA called "ICNA Relief USA", an organization in New York City, which, among other things, helps women with temporary housing. When a rumormonger made similar false accusations against the Farid Foundation some time ago, the Anti-Defamation League responded that such "allegations lack[ed] context and nuance and [the accuser] [did] not offer any clear evidence to support them. Even if the Farid Foundation has provided funding for some of the American Muslim groups she referenc[ed], we believe it [was] an unsupported stretch to conclude that the Foundation or Edible Arrangements [funded] Hamas." Most egregious and defamatory is the articles clear implication that Mr. Farid and the Farid Foundation supports the goals of an alleged terrorist (Ashrafuzzaman Khan) or overseas terrorist groups. There is not a shred of objective fact, cited or existing, to support this false assertion. In addition, the article is in part based on false allegations contained in a complaint of an ex-employee of Edible Arrangements. Mr. Farid and Edible Arrangements have refuted those allegations in their answer and will obtain dismissal of all claims in the litigation. Blue MauMau's original article has not been retracted, and its author published a follow-up the next day stating (in part): follow-up A few observations regarding the Edible Arrangements statement: The franchise does not dispute that the head of ICNA was recently convicted of war crimes in Bangladesh. The franchise says that Edible Arrangements actually gave money to "a special fund" of ICNA. In other words, although ICNA may have been run by a man convicted of torture and murder of 18 people, he also ran "a special fund" which "helps women with temporary housing." Members of the public may find this a distinction without a difference, and they may also find it relevant that Edible Arrangements does not see any problem with ICNA's history of behavior, nor does it see any problem with the head of ICNA being a party to torture. My guess is that the people who were tortured and murdered might disagree with Tariq Farid. The franchise says that a "reasonable reader" may believe that Edible Arrangements and Tariq Farid "support these alleged acts of terrorism."  Well, yes. That is a "reasonable" reading of the uncontroverted facts laid out in the BlueMauMau article. Whatever the truth of those issues regarding ICNA may be, the evidence for a direct financial link between ICNA and Hamas (and thus between Edible Arrangements and Hamas) still appears rather tenuous. Last updated:  2 August 2014    O'Connor, Clare.  "How Edible Arrangements Sold $500 Million of Fruit Bouquets in 2013."   Forbes.  8 April 2014.     Williston, Corbin.  "Edible Arrangements Suit Renews Questions of Terrorist Support."   Blue MauMau.  30 March 2014.     Williston, Corbin.  "Edible Arrangements Denies Funding Terrorists."   Blue MauMau.  31 March 2014.     The Jerusalem Post.  "Israel Bans Islamic Relief Worldwide from West Bank Due to Hamas Ties."   19 June 2014. Beto ORourke, the Democratic nominee challenging Republican U.S. Sen.Ted Cruzof Texas, said that vast U.S. wealth differences show the economy doesnt work for everyone. The El Paso congressmans half-page ad, in theHouston Defenders July 26, 2018,issue, shows ORourke shaking hands with an African-American man. Accompanying text says: Our economy isn't working for everyone when black Americans have 10 times less wealth than white Americans. Let's level the playing field by ensuring access to good jobs, higher pay, skills training, and a fair shot at economic success. A reminder: Wealth is distinct from income. It measures how much we own, not how much we make. While the two are closely tied, economists talk about wealth in terms of net worth. A house, for example, adds to net worth if its value is higher than the amount of the mortgage. Assets minus debts gives you net worth. 2016 federal survey We asked ORourkes campaign about the basis of ORourkes 10 times less claim in the ad, which had come to our attention in a Texas Tribunenews storyon ORourkes advertising expenditures. By email, Chris Evans of ORourkes campaign pointed out an October 2017Washington PostWonkblogstoryand other reports rooted in 2016 consumer survey data summed up by the Federal Reserve in fall 2017. That data, Evans told us, pegged the median net worth of white families at 10 times the median net worth of black families. The Wonkblog story says that according to the survey results, the median net worth of white families  $171,000  is now 10 times that of black families and eight times that of Hispanic families. A factor, the story says, is that white families are five times more likely than black or Hispanic families to inherit money. That translates into opportunity  a down payment on a home, tuition to go to school, capital to build a small business, savings to retire on. Other factors, the story says, include distinct rates of home ownership and participation in job-related savings plans. Median and average wealth differences According to apairofSeptember 2017 Federal Reserve articles, the agencys 2016 Survey of Consumer Financesreached6,254 familieswith queries onhouseholds total pre-tax income, balance sheets, pensions, income and demographic characteristics. No other study for the country collects comparable information, the agency says. The 2016 survey found about a 10-to-1 difference in the median wealth/net worth of white and black Americans--the ratio between $171,000 and $17,600. Net worth is defined as the difference between families' gross assets and their liabilities. The survey results otherwise suggest the difference in the average wealth of white and black Americans is nearly 7-to-1--$933,700 for white residents and $138,200 for black residents. (An equal number of households earn more and less than each median. Averages are based on adding up reported incomes and dividing by the number of households.) The Fed offered one other comparison: Nearly 1 in 5 black households reported zero or negative net worth compared to a smaller share of white households, 9 percent, the study says. Factors behind white-black difference We spotted a Fed chart specifying disparities by race identified in the survey in household income and by whether people reported owning  homes and cars or having retirement accounts: SOURCE:Excerpted from chart in data analysis,Recent Trends in Wealth-Holding by Race and Ethnicity: Evidence from the Survey of Consumer Finances,FEDS Notes, Board of Governors of the Federal Reserve System, Sept. 27, 2017 (accessed Aug. 17, 2018) As ORourkes spokesman also noted, the Pew Research Center took a longer view of the wealth disparity singled out by ORourke. Pews November 2017 Fact Tankstorysays that according to the Feds surveys over the years, the wealth gap between white and black and Hispanic households shrank by about half from 2007 to 2016. The month before, another non-partisan entity, the Urban Institute,updated its chartsdrawing on the Feds surveys. For more than 50 years, the institute says, white families have outpaced black and Hispanic families in average wealth. We asked the institute to evaluate ORourkes claim. The statement had the right spirit, we heard back, thoughCaroline Ratcliffe, a senior fellow, offered a caveat in that the 2016 Fed survey suggests that black Americans had one-tenth the median wealth of whites, not 10 times less. Older survey A 2014PunditFact fact-checkled us to fetch what turned out to be older results from a different survey. In June 2017, the U.S. Census Bureaureleasedits estimates of household net incomes attributed to its 2013Survey of Income and Program Participation. Tables in the release suggest that white households at the time had median net worths of $103,796 and black households had net worths of $9,211--signaling an 11-to-1 ratio. White households had average net worths of $292,217, the bureau says, compared to $91,595 for black households--indicating a 3-to-1 ratio. Our ruling ORourke said that black Americans have 10 times less wealth than white Americans. Survey results pinpoint two ways to gauge such disparities. According to the Feds 2016 consumer survey, black Americans had one-tenth the median wealth of white Americans while black Americans had a little over one-seventh the average wealth of white Americans. We rate this claim Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check.