Says
With nearly 75 percent of Americans supportive of the construction of the pipeline, Schrader needs to explain to Oregon families why he voted against this needed project.
The communications office of theNational Republican Congressional Committeeisnt letting up on Rep. Kurt Schrader, D-Ore. Its recently peppered him with criticism over the sequester and President Barack Obamas health care overhaul. This time, the issue is construction of a controversial pipeline that would carry crude oil from Canada to the U.S. Gulf Coast for refinement. A May 23, 2013, press release targeted Schrader for voting againstH.R. 3, a bill that would allow TransCanada tostart building the Keystone XL Pipelinewithout approval from President Barack Obama. Specifically, the legislation skips further environmental review and removes barriers to construction. With nearly 75 percent of Americans supportive of the construction of the pipeline, Schrader needs to explain to Oregon families why he voted against this needed project, the release states. Three-quarters of Americans want this project to happen? We know surveys can sometimes use scurrilous, squirrelly language, so we thought wed take a look-see. Plus, while Schrader is a veterinarian who loves animals, the man is no tree-hugging environmentalist. Does he oppose construction? Lets tackle the 75 percent statistic first. The NRCC relies on a survey conducted byNanos Researchthat was the subject of an April 2013 news report in the Wall Street Journal. Heres the survey question: Based on what you have heard about the proposed Keystone XL Pipeline between Canada and the U.S., do you support, somewhat support, somewhat oppose or oppose the US/Canadian government approving the project? Of Americans, 52 percent said they support the project and 22 percent said they somewhat support it. Nanos, a respected independent polling firm, isnt the only one to find that a majority of respondents in the United States support construction. An April 2013Pew Research poll found 66 percent in favorwith 23 percent opposed. The poll found broader support among Republicans and independents; Democrats are more divided. We checked with Daniel Kessler, amedia campaigner with 350.org, which opposes Keystone. The Nanos polling question looked sound to him, although he wanted to remind readers thatother surveys show high support for clean energy alternativesand efforts to combat global warming. Now, lets address the second part of the statement. As we stated earlier, H.R. 3 eliminates the need for White House approval to start the project. Its undisputed that Schrader voted against the bill. Nineteen House Democrats joined majority Republicans to send the bill to the Senate, where it sits. No House Democrat from Oregon voted for the legislation. In fact, theNRCC targeted a number of Democrats with the same press release, including Rep. Peter DeFazio, D-Ore.  A spokesman for Schrader said the congressman supports construction in principle, just not the way Republicans are going about it. To say that he does not support the construction on the pipeline is false, wrote spokesman Cody Tucker in an email to PolitiFact Oregon. Annie Clark with the NRCC disagrees. She cited four other times where Schrader voted against construction. Schrader voted against constructing or expediting construction of the Keystone XL Pipeline every chance he had, she wrote to PolitiFact Oregon. We checked his other votes. The legislation sought to force Obama to act or bypassed him altogether in approving Keystone. Loads of House Democrats voted against the bills. Schrader did voteagainst H.R. 3,which eliminates further regulatory hurdles, eliminates presidential input and essentially gives congressional go-ahead for construction. This statement by itself we would rate Half True. It is partially accurate in that Schrader did vote against the legislation, which authorizes the project. But it is missing significant details in that Schrader supports construction in principle, just not this particular way to get there. Had the NRCC said that Schrader voted against the bill -- as opposed to the project -- the statement would be True. The NRCC is accurate in citing that nearly 75 percent of Americans support construction of the Keystone XL pipeline. The Nanos survey is solid, as is a Pew Research poll that showed two-thirds support. With the polling part True and the project part Half True, that brings our ruling to Mostly True for this two-part statement. (If you want to leave a comment, go to http://www.oregonlive.com/politics/index.ssf/2013/06/did_kurt_schrader_vote_against.html#incart_m-rpt-2)
In early March 2020, a number of social media users posted a video of a genuine shoplifting incident in San Francisco, California, along with commentary that the incident was evidence of "radical left" leadership that led to lenient policies that were responsible for the crime: social media users video https://youtu.be/PZfcOuRAwzISpecifically, some viewers claimed the crime was the result of some unspecified "no arrest" policy in the city of San Francisco. Others stated the incident was the upshot of California Proposition 47, a 2014 ballot measure that, among other reforms, created a new penal code for shoplifting that didn't exist before, classifying it as a misdemeanor if the dollar amount stolen was less than $950. no arrest Others Proposition 47 Both claims are false.We contacted the San Francisco Police Department (SFPD), and a spokesman there said the shoplifting incident was real and occurred about 1 p.m. on Feb. 29, 2020. Employees at the Walgreens drugstore where it occurred told police that three females, possibly minors, took "several cosmetic items," then fled before police arrived. The investigation remains open and no arrests have been made.  San Francisco Police Officer Robert Rueca said that SFPD doesn't have a "no arrest" policy. "If we have the probable cause to believe that someone has committed a crime, we will arrest the suspects and present that case to the District Attorney," Rueca said in an email to Snopes. It's also a mischaracterization of events to claim the crime was allowed to occur because of purported leniency resulting from Prop 47.  A person who is accused of committing any misdemeanor can be arrested and face jail time under California state law. Shoplifting in the state is punishable by up to six months in county jail. Shoplifting is defined under California law as "entering a commercial establishment with intent to commit larceny while that establishment is open during regular business hours, where the value of the property that is taken or intended to be taken does not exceed nine hundred fifty dollars ($950)." punishable defined Prop 47, which California voters approved in 2014, reclassified some minor crimes as misdemeanors instead of felonies, with the intent of reducing what was at the time a severely overcrowded prison population. The aim was also to reduce the number of people serving long sentences and ending up with felony-conviction records for petty crimes.  Prop 47 increased the felony threshold for certain types of theft from $450 to $950  meaning the simple theft of property valued below $950 is a misdemeanor. It also reduced simple drug possession (possession of drugs without the intent to sell) to a misdemeanor. The claim that Prop 47 is to blame for the incident depicted in the video is representative of misinformation that has been circulating about the law for years, said George Gascn, the former district attorney of San Francisco who is now running for the same position in Los Angeles County and who co-authored Prop 47. Although the threshold for misdemeanor-versus-felony theft prior to Prop 47 was $450, it's unclear whether the new law makes any potential difference in the San Francisco case. In the video, the thieves are seen stuffing drugstore-brand cosmetics into bags. It's unknown how much the items were worth  SFPD would not give us an estimate. "Prop 47 doesnt cover robberies, theft by the use of force or fear. It doesn't cover burglaries," Gascn said. "If you break into a structure with the intent to commit theft or another felony, that continues to be a felony. If someone breaks into your car to steal even a pack of cigarettes, thats still a felony. Even the crimes that are covered by Prop 47, they were not decriminalized. We moved them from a felony to a misdemeanor. [Perpetrators] can still go to county jail" if they are convicted. The claim that increasing the value of shoplifted property to meet a felony threshold is contributing to a rash of crime in California is spurious, given that other states have higher thresholds (Texas' felony threshold, for instance, is $2,500). A 2018 Pew Research study found that states that increased thresholds to account for inflation did not see a resulting uptick in crime as a result. $2,500 study Gascn said that when crafting Prop 47, he and his co-authors purposely looked at felony thresholds in red states. States like Texas and Tennessee "had significantly higher thresholds between felonies and misdemeanors," Gascn told us. Part of the intent behind Prop 47 was to deal with inequality embedded in the system, Gascn said. For example, crack possession used to be a felony while possession of drugs like methamphetamines and cocaine were what were known as "wobblers," he said, which is jargon for crimes that prosecutors had some discretion to charge either as misdemeanors or felonies. Racial discrepancies existed in terms of who was most likely to have those drugs; African Americans, for instance, were more likely to be charged with felony drug possession than whites were, he said. Prop 47 was also intended to address severe overcrowding in California's prisons and meet a federal court order to alleviate it. In 2011, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that overcrowding in the state's prison system was unconstitutional. Prop 47 succeeded in helping the state reach key benchmarks by reducing low-level, non-violent offenses like drug possession, petty theft, and writing bad checks to misdemeanors so long as the amounts in question did not exceed $950. The effect was a decrease in the prison population and also a reduction in recidivism. ruled reduction A 2018 study conducted by the University of California at Irvine found no evidence that Prop 47 resulted in an increase in crime. Meantime, violent crime and property crime in California remain at historic lows. study historic lows In summary, the claim that a "no arrest policy" exists in San Francisco appears to be made up. We also found no evidence that a change in California state law in regards to misdemeanor shoplifting directly contributed to this incident. We therefore rate this claim   California Courts."Proposition 47: The Safe Neighborhoods and Schools Act." Los Angeles Times Editorial Board."Editorial: No, Prop 47 Didnt De-Criminalize Misdemeanors."
Los Angeles Times.18 July 2018. Arango, Tim."In California, Criminal Justice Reform Offers a Lesson for the Nation."
The New York Times.21 January 2018. Vock, Daniel V."After Years of Court Orders, California's Prison Population Finally Hits Target."
Governing.9 October 2015. Totenberg, Nina."High Court Rules Calif. Must Cut Prison Population."
NPR.23 May 2011. UCI News."Proposition 47 Not Responsible for Recent Upticks in Crime Across California, UCI study Says."
7 March 2018. Public Policy Institute of California."The Impact of Proposition 47 on Crime and Recidivism."
June 2018. Public Policy Institute of California."Crime Trends in California." Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but the misinformation keeps on ticking. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. here On Dec. 11, 2020, a Twitter user posted a new permutation of a conspiracy theory about Dominion Voting Systems, the technology firm that provided voting systems in multiple U.S. jurisdictions in the November 2020 election, and which has also been the target of a disinformation campaign falsely claiming its systems were used to perpetrate widespread voter fraud. technology firm falsely claiming One of the narratives in the election fraud conspiracy theory holds that voting machines provided by Dominion switched votes from ballots cast for U.S. President Donald Trump to his challenger, Joe Biden, who is now president-elect. Trump has refused to accept his electoral loss, and has perpetuated the lie that Dominion machines were used en masse to flip votes. perpetuated Hence, more than a month after Biden was declared winner of the election, conspiracy theories continued to flourish. In this case, a Twitter user falsely claimed that Dominion is owned by a member of Biden family, namely his nephew. But the tweet in question is nothing but a patchwork of misleading screenshots and assumptions, based on people sharing a common surname. We cropped the user's name out below: falsely claimed   The screenshots in the meme above contain what appear to be the professional biographies of two men, Stephen Owens and R. Kevin Owens, neither of which mentions Dominion. The meme included in the tweet points to President-elect Biden's sister and campaign manager Valerie Biden Owens, with the alleged clincher being that Stephen Owens, a co-founder of Staple Street Capital, an investment firm that owns 75% stake in Dominion, shares a surname. However, "Owens" is a common last name, so that hardly serves as proof at all. co-founder owns Valerie and her husband, John T. Owens, have three children, none named Stephen. A spokesperson for Staple Street confirmed in an email to Snopes that Stephen Owens has no relation to the Biden family. three children And although the meme includes mention of R. Kevin Owens, an attorney who is related to Valerie's husband, we see no connection between this person and Dominion. related In other iterations of this conspiracy theory, the voting systems company has been falsely linked to deceased Venezuelan President Hugo Chavez, as well as various Democratic politicians, including U.S. House Speaker Nancy Pelosi, California U.S. Sen. Dianne Feinstein, and the Clinton Foundation, the charitable foundation run by former President Bill and Secretary of State Hillary Clinton. Hugo Chavez including Trump's own administration has undermined his post-election disinformation blitz by stating the November 2020 election was "the most secure in American history." undermined "There is no evidence that any voting system deleted or lost votes, changed votes, or was in any way compromised," the Cybersecurity and Infrastructure Security Agency, which is a component of the U.S. Department of Homeland Security, said in a Nov. 12, 2020, statement. statement Updated to note that a Staples Street representative confirmed Stephen Owens isn't related to the Bidens. Claim:  A badly behaved dog wreaks havoc while two fellows stand by silently, each thinking it's the other guy's pooch. LEGEND Examples:  [Brunvand, 1989] A woman is invited to call at the home of a woman who is wealthier than she is. From the moment she is invited, the caller is unsure about how to behave  how to sit, how to take tea, etc. And matters are made worse when the time of the visit arrives. A large, lively, dirty, beast of a dog is sitting in the front yard, and when the hostess welcomes the caller into the house, the dog follows her inside. While the caller tries to respect the social amenities, that darn dog does not. It tracks mud about the room, sniffs the cookies, and paws the furniture. The caller makes small talk, but the conversation becomes strained. Still, both parties keep a stiff upper lip, observing proper etiquette. Finally, the visit comes to an end. As the caller rises to leave, the hostess, with one eye on the wreckage, remarks icily, "And don't forget to take your dog!" "My dog?" the caller says. "I thought it was yours!"  [Regis, 1987] In January 1946 Bigelow came down to Princeton for an interview with Von Neumann. He was a couple of hours late . . . Julian Bigelow got out of the car and walked up to the house.  "Von Neumann lived in this elegant lodge house on Westcott Road in Princeton," Bigelow says. "As I parked my car and walked in, there was this very large Great Dane dog bouncing around on the front lawn. I knocked on the door and Von Neumann, who was a small, quiet, modest kind of a man came to the door and bowed to me and said, 'Bigelow, won't you come in,' and so forth, and this dog brushed between our legs and went into the living room. He proceeded to lie down on the rug in front of everybody, and we had the entire interview  whether I would come, what I knew, what the job was going to be like  and this lasted maybe forty minutes, with the dog wandering all around the house. Towards the end of it, von Neumann asked me if I always traveled with the dog. But of course it wasn't my dog, and it wasn't his either, but von Neumann  being a diplomatic, middle European type person  he kindly avoided mentioning it until the end."  [Mahoney, 1983] In passing I must make mention of a funny situation in which I became involved while visiting Field Marshal Lord Alexander and his wife at their home near London.  I motored there to have luncheon with them, and as I emerged from my car, a huge dog appeared in the driveway.  Dogs always made a dead set for me, and I wasn't worried when it began jumping around and wagging its tail.  But I did feel some concern when it followed me to the doorway and walked in as if it owned the house. A family pet, I felt sure, as it settled down to a corner of the living room as Lord and Lady Alexander greeted me warmly.  At luncheon the dog settled down at my feet and the begging for food began.  Lady Alexander's attention became riveted upon me: "Mr. Mahoney," she said charmingly, "I wish you would send your dog outside." And not until then did it dawn upon me that they thought the stray dog was mine! Origins:  Though this story has often been told as an actual event in an important person's life, its first appearance came in a 1924 Lucy Maud Montgomery book, Emily Climbs. In Chapter   12, Emily's call on socially-superior Miss Janet Royal is interrupted by the antics of a very large muddy dog that follows her into the elegant parlor, where it proceeds to act up.  to the legend, only after the beast has made a shambles of things and Emily is about to leave does the subject of the dog's ownership arise, each girl thinking up until that time the horrid thing belonged to the other. From those early beginnings, the "Not my dog" anecdote has gone on to reach a succession of new audiences, as new storytellers emerge and claim it as their own. Burt Reynolds is rumored to have told this story (starring himself as the embarrassed visitor) to Johnny Carson on The Tonight Show in the 1980s. A common element in this story is unequal status between visitor and visited. The one who comes calling feels inferior for reasons relating to social standing, comparative wealth, or the celebrated householder's achievements. Whatever the cause, he comes hat in hand, filled with a determination to make a good impression  a certain recipe for social disaster! The story is one of horrific embarrassment; the faux pas being perceived as being that much more flamboyant because it plays out before someone looked up to. That matters are straightened out before the visit ends by the caller blurting out, "My dog? I thought he was yours!" doesn't change the  momentary flash of mortification experienced or the knowledge that the sought-after host had sat there for quite a while thinking decidedly evil thoughts about his guest. The story is also a poke at the strictures of etiquette. Neither host nor guest feels it would be proper to comment negatively on the dog's behavior, so both endure the worsening state of affairs in stoic silence. The legend underscores common misperceptions about etiquette, that the rules of polite behavior are often impractical and adherence to them results in ridiculous situations a more direct approach would head off at the pass. Those who resent the genteelly-voiced demands of Miss Manners and long for less structured, more direct forms of social interaction get to savor a moment of self-congratulation through this story because it proves right what they've been saying all along. As old as this story is (1924, remember?) it continues to pop up, and even at times changes in dramatic ways. We picked up the following non-canine version of the tale during our Internet travels, again proving that no story can't stand a little improving: [Collected on the Internet, 2002] The story goes along the lines of a young Indo-asian couple who after a non-arranged marriage, decide to get a house together. A few weeks after they move in, the husband returns from work to find an older woman in the living room of the house. Knowing they have broken with tradition by having a non-arranged marriage, the husband greets his mother-in-law, only to receive a hard silent stare. She is evidently not happy at their recent union. That evening the old woman joins the couple at the dinner table, and continues to join them for every meal for the next month, never uttering a word. Eventually the once-close couple become hostile to one another, unhappy that 'Mother' has been allowed to move in with them. They stop talking and avoid one another. A few days later the situation escalates into an argument about the old woman. The creepy truth is revealed as the wife exclaims "My mother? I thought she was yours!" Barbara "vinegar mother" Mikkelson Last updated:  2 August 2011 Curses! Broiled Again!   Brunvand, Jan Harold.  Too Good To Be .  New York: W. W. Norton, 1999.   ISBN 0-393-04734-2  (pp. 55-57). Too Good To Be    Mahoney, Patrick.  Barbed Wit & Malicious Humor.  New York: Citadel Press, 1956.  (p. 100).    Regis, Edward.  Who Got Einstein's Office?   Reading, Mass: Addison-Wesley, 1987  (p. 110).   Healey, Phil and Rick Glanvill.  Now! That's What I Call Urban Myths.  London: Virgin Books, 1996.  ISBN 0-86369-969-3  (pp. 105-106). Now! That's What I Call Urban Myths   The Big Book of Urban Legends.  New York: Paradox Press, 1994.  ISBN 1-56389-165-4  (p. 39). The Big Book of Urban Legends In an advertisement urging lawmakers to fund public education, the Texas Association of School Boards bullets a half dozen claims about the states public schools ranging from current student enrollment to a reminder that legislators cut education aid in 2011.One claim in the ad, whichappears onlineand also filled a page in the April 24, 2013,Austin American-Statesman, was especially familiar--and flawed.Now Texas ranks 49th in per-pupil funding among the states, the ad said when we looked.A few days earlier, werated as Mostly Truea similar claim by state Sen. Wendy Davis, D-Fort Worth, who like the school boards group depended on preliminary spending estimates calculated by the National Education Association, the nations largest teachers union. In February 2012, the association said that Texas schools are spending $8,400 per student this year on items such as salaries for school personnel, student transportation, school books and energy. Its breakdown suggests Texas per-student expenditures trailed such spending in every state but two.Those calculations place Texas 48th among the states in per-student spending.And how might someone conclude, like the school boards association, that Texas ranks 49th? The compiled figures, shown on Summary Table K in the associations report, downloadablehere, reflect spending within each state plus schools in the District of Columbia, which has current estimated expenditures of more than $14,000 per student. Consequently, the Texas spending level falls 49th among the 50 states plus D.C. By phone, Catherine Clark, associate executive director of the school boards association, confirmed that the group relied on the NEA calculations in declaring Texas as 49th in education spending among the states. If spending in the D.C. schools figures into that conclusion, Clark said, then were wrong.Our rulingThe group said Texas ranks 49th in per-pupil funding among the states.Texas ranks 48th among the states, according to preliminary figures, and 49th only if one also considers spending in the schools in Washington, D.C., which is not a state.This claim is close to accurate, but without the D.C. clarification, it rates as Mostly True. As parts of Pakistan and India saw life-threatening temperatures that broke recent records in spring 2022, a map depicting what appeared to be record-setting land surface temperatures was hot on social media.  The above tweet was by posted by the ADAM Platform account on April 29, 2022. ADAM stands for the Advanced geospatial Data Management (ADAM) tool that compiles global environmental data. Its part of the European Open Science Cloud, an initiative to make scientific data publicly available. The ADAM account noted that the image above was collected by the Copernicus Sentinel 3 Land Surface Temperature (LST) device, a satellite operating under the European Space Agency that collects land surface temperature. ADAM Copernicus Sentinel 3 Widely circulated on social media, the LST map shared by the ADAM platform indeed painted a dire picture for residents living under oppressive temperatures in Southeast Asia. But some social media users unintentionally used the map out of context. out of context The post came as India and Pakistan saw an intense heatwave in early spring as temperatures in parts of the two countries reached record levels. Indian government officials stated that April was the third-hottest the country had seen since 1901, with an average maximum of 95.5 degrees Fahrenheit. Meanwhile, Pakistan was similarly plagued by warming temperatures in what could be an equally dire situation for both nations, where many lack access to air conditioning. reached record levels stated third-hottest average maximum plagued To understand how LST differs from air temperature, Snopes spoke with Cascade Tuholske, a postdoctoral research scientist at the Columbia Climate School, in a series of questions and answers: Columbia Climate School NASA Earth Observatory Tuholske (T): LST is the radiated heat from the ground, while air temperature is the air heat we experience as humans, sometimes called 2-meter air temperature. It is important to note that LST varies much more over short distances and short time frames than air temperature. We can think about this by touching the asphalt of a parking lot on a really hot day next to a baseball field. The asphalt to the touch is hot, whereas the grass on the field is much cooler. Yet the air temperature on our skin, which is likely somewhere between the temperature of the asphalt and the grass, does not change much as we move from the parking lot to the field. Thus, the LST of heat-absorbing surfaces on the ground, like asphalt, are very hot when we use a satellite to measure LST from space. But we don't live directly on top of the ground; we live 5 or 6 feet above the ground, and thus air temperature is much more important to understanding heat impacts to human health and well-being. Another way to think about this is to turn on a stove. When we put our hand on the stove, we get burned. But when we move away, the heat of the stove dissipates. The stove will heat the air in a room, but that depends on how long we keep the stove on and how well the room is insulated.  NOAA Climate T: Wet bulb temperature (WBT) and wet bulb globe temperature (WBGT) are very specific metrics that account for humidity but in very different ways, and they should not be confused. Per this explanation, WBT is: "Wet bulb temperature is the lowest temperature to which air can be cooled by the evaporation of water into the air at a constant pressure." explanation WBT is a psychrometric is constructed from the air temperature (dry bulb), pressure, and water in a parcel of air. psychrometric WBGT is a metric that was created to estimate the combined impact of air temperature, humidity, radiated heat (e.g., land surface temperature), and wind on human physical output. It is measured with a field instrument and tied to several occupational heat health standards. WBGT Both WBGT and WBT are two of many different metrics that try to assess how air temperature and humidity combined impact human health and well-being. In the U.S., a widely used metric that also does this is the Heat Index. Humidity is important to account for because at certain thresholds, with enough water in the air, we don't get any cooling benefit from sweating. widely used metric  Both WBGT and WBT cannot be calculated from LST directly. Thus any attempt to use LST to estimate WBT or WBGT is not only inaccurate, it is highly misleading. T: Both WBGT and WBT cannot be calculated from LST directly. Thus, any attempt to use LST to estimate WBT or WBGT is not only inaccurate, but also highly misleading. This is not to say high LST values do not have impacts on human health and well-being. But it should not be used to measure direct impacts. In areas where we do not have good air temperature data, like much of India, LST is still a useful proxy for understanding impacts to human health and well-being. Further, LST is quite useful for looking at impacts on crops and plants, as it is tied to soil moisture and canopy temperatures. This is important for understanding how heat waves impact food production or wildfire likelihood.  T: There are very clear limits in WBT that the human body can handle with even a few hours of exposure. Basically, when WBT hits between 32 and 35 degrees Celsius, humans do not get an evaporative cooling benefit from sweating. Even with any amount of water, we face high the likelihood of heat stroke, organ failure, and death at these upper WBT thresholds. These WBT thresholds have recently started to be crossed (and may be crossed more frequently going forward) in some of the most populated places on the planet. This means for those living and working in these locations, being outside may be deadly. between evaporative cooling benefit started to be crossed  T: Plants, humans, and animals are all impacted by heat differently. Humans, generally, can only tolerate WBT temperatures of between 30 and 35 degrees Celsius. I expect to see significant decreases in labor output in many of the most populated places on the planet where billions of people's livelihoods, both in cities and in rural areas, depend on working outside. I hope we adapt fast enough to prevent mass fatality events, though the heat wave in North America last year shows we need to raise awareness and prepare for extreme heat everywhere. T: The heat wave in Southern Asia is impacting the poorest and most vulnerable people on the planet right now. We have tools and the resources to move these people out of harm's way right now. We don't need new technologies per se. We need the political and cultural will to spend money to help vulnerable people. What is disturbing to me is that the rich and powerful worldwide do not care enough to create collective and coordinated action. T: We must rethink what we value as humans. Do we value the well-being of others, especially the poorest? I would say our current economic systems reflect that no, in fact, we do not value vulnerable people. If we shift resources to raise the floor so to speak, we will deploy tools we already have  like effective early-warning systems, cash transfers for those who can't work because of heat, infrastructure investments so electricity doesn't cut during heat waves and a/c units work, and so forth  and we can reduce the impacts of extreme heat. We have the tools to adapt to extreme heat. We just have to use them. I am hopeful we will. Sources Clifford, Catherine. Indias Record-Setting Heat Wave in Pictures. CNBC, 2 May 2022, https://www.cnbc.com/2022/05/02/india-heat-wave-in-pictures.html. CNN, Rhea Mogul, Esha Mitra, Manveena Suri and Sophia Saifi. India and Pakistan Heatwave Is Testing the Limits of Human Survivability. CNN, https://www.cnn.com/2022/05/02/asia/india-pakistan-heatwave-climate-intl-hnk/index.html. Accessed 3 May 2022. Columbia Climate School. https://www.climate.columbia.edu/. Accessed 3 May 2022. Development of the weather and climate service CRITERION for the touristic sector in e-SHAPE. Ilmastokatsaus, vol. 4, no. 1, Feb. 2022. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.35614/ISSN-2341-6408-IK-2022-03-RL. Freedman, Andrew. India and Pakistan Heat Wave Sets Monthly Records, Triggers Fires and Power Outages. Axios, 2 May 2022, https://www.axios.com/india-pakistan-heat-wave-climate-change-records-a59a1070-e367-43ba-aedc-296670267294.html. Home Page. Adam Platform, https://adamplatform.eu/. Accessed 3 May 2022. Https://Twitter.Com/Leahmcelrath/Status/1520863600642039808. Twitter, https://twitter.com/leahmcelrath/status/1520863600642039808. Accessed 3 May 2022. Https://Twitter.Com/Platformadam/Status/1519980107217129472. Twitter, https://twitter.com/platformadam/status/1519980107217129472. Accessed 3 May 2022. Mellen, Ruby, and William Neff. Beyond Human Endurance. Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2021/climate-change-humidity/. Accessed 3 May 2022. Beyond Human Endurance. Washington Post, https://www.washingtonpost.com/world/interactive/2021/climate-change-humidity/. Accessed 3 May 2022. Psychrometrics. Wikipedia, 30 Apr. 2022. Wikipedia, https://en.wikipedia.org/w/index.php?title=Psychrometrics&oldid=1085398029. Raymond, Colin, et al. The Emergence of Heat and Humidity Too Severe for Human Tolerance. Science Advances, vol. 6, no. 19, May 2020, p. eaaw1838. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaw1838. The Emergence of Heat and Humidity Too Severe for Human Tolerance. Science Advances, vol. 6, no. 19, May 2020, p. eaaw1838. DOI.org (Crossref), https://doi.org/10.1126/sciadv.aaw1838. Vecellio, Daniel J., et al. Evaluating the 35C Wet-Bulb Temperature Adaptability Threshold for Young, Healthy Subjects (PSU HEAT Project). Journal of Applied Physiology, vol. 132, no. 2, Feb. 2022, pp. 34045. Penn State, https://doi.org/10.1152/japplphysiol.00738.2021. Wet-Bulb Temperature - an Overview | ScienceDirect Topics. https://www.sciencedirect.com/topics/engineering/wet-bulb-temperature. Accessed 3 May 2022. Scam:  Card-skimming thieves can make fraudulent purchases with information read from RFID-enabled credit cards carried in pockets and purses.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, December 2010] Just received an email concerning "Credit Card Pickpocketing". It was broadcast from Memphis WREG TV.  [Collected via e-mail, October 2012] PLEASE WATCH THIS VIDEO I read this about a couple weeks ago, and then checked my cards for the little "WiFi Signal Icon" on each one.  I found none w/that signal on them, but I was determined to watch for it when my cards came in on renewals. Well, yesterday I got my CHASE SLATE card AND THERE IT WAS!  My first time to see it. I'll not activate that card after seeing this.  I guess I'll go to the bank and see if I can replace it w/a non wi fi (Radio Frequency Card)....? Thought all my contacts ought to see this if you've not already seen this demo....wow!  Origins:  In December 2010, Memphis television station WREG aired an "Electronic Pickpocketing" piece on the potential risks posed by "contactless" credit/debit/ATM cards containing embedded RFID (radio frequency identification technology) chips.  Such chips encode basic information (e.g., account numbers, expiration dates) that can be picked up by point-of-sale RFID readers, eliminating the need for cards to be physically handled or swiped.  One possible drawback to this technology is unauthorized persons might use RFID readers of their own to surreptitiously glean that same information, as demonstrated in WREG's report, which featured Walt Augustinowicz of Identity Stronghold using a card reader and a netbook computer to engage in card "skimming"  picking up account information off RFID-enabled cards carried in the pockets and purses of random passers-by on the street.  A few days after it broadcast the original "Electronic Pickpocketing" story, WREG reported the piece had gone  Electronic Pickpocketing  viral, racking up 1.2 million views in just three days. Despite all the publicity WREG's report garnered, the concept of RFID-enabled credit card theft was hardly a new one.  Various news, technical, and security  outlets have been reporting (and demonstrating) for several years the potential risk that information transmitted wirelessly by RFID-enabled cards might be picked up by eavesdropping thieves using relatively cheap equipment.  But although (as demonstrated in WREG's piece) it's certainly possible for interlopers to read pieces of information from some contactless cards under some circumstances, the extent to which this activity might be used to facilitate theft is currently difficult to gauge. reporting As the WREG report noted, representatives from the Identity Theft Resource Center said "they've never seen a case of RFID skimming used to steal information,"  but it's also the case that it would be difficult (if not impossible) for skimming victims to identify exactly how their card information had been stolen. Nonetheless, other analysts have offered reasons why they believe card skimming may not be nearly as much of a threat as some reports have made it sound:  The data streams emitted by contactless cards don't include such information as PINs and CVV (Card Verification Value) security codes  or, in newer cards,  customer names  and without those pieces of information a card skimmer should not be able to utilize the stolen card numbers to print up counterfeit cards or engage in Card Not Present (CNP) transactions: CNP None of the cards transmits the additional number on the front or back, known as the card validation code, that some businesses require for online purchases. [C]ompany representatives argued [that] the process of making purchases with the cards involves verification procedures based on powerful encryption that make each transaction unique. Most cards, they said, actually transmit a dummy number that does not match the number embossed on the card, and that number can be used only in connection with the verification "token," or a small bit of code, that is encrypted before being sent. "It's basically useless information," said David Bonalle, vice president and general manager for advanced payments at American Express. "You can't steal that data and just play it back and expect that transaction to work." However, some merchants are not assiduous about requiring extra levels of security information from their customers beyond credit card number and expiration date, and security providers contend that card skimmers can still find plenty of places to make purchases with nothing more than 16-digit account numbers and expiration dates.  Although some contactless cards can be read from as far as a few feet away, refinements to the RFID technology employed in newer cards limits their transmission range to a much smaller distance.   Although RFID-enabled cards may have originally transmitted their information in plain text, newer contactless cards are adding encryption to the data streams and thus cannot be read directly by ordinary card readers.  (Encryption requires additional processing time, however, so businesses that place a premium on speed may still eschew its use in their card processing systems.)  Card skimming generally works when the victim is carrying only a single contactless card; otherwise, the transmissions from multiple cards can create a jumbled, unintelligible stream. It remains the case that cardholders are not liable for the fraudulent use of their credit card information, but consumers who are extra cautious have the option of investing in secure sleeves that shield the RFID signals transmitted by their cards from electronic eavesdroppers. On 17 February 2016, an updated version of the rumor began making the rounds, this time accompanied by a photo of a man holding a Point of Sale (PoS) device: version   In theory, all that a thief would need to do would be to enter a price lower than 30, then tap the device against people's pockets and they would be charged. Almost all new bank cards and credit cards issued in the UK now offer the chips, which allow users to authorise small transactions without entering a PIN code. Facebook user R Jarvis claims he saw the alleged scammer at work, saying, "So this guy was spotted wandering round with a Point of Sale (POS) device. All he has to do is key in a price less than 30 and then touch the device on the pocket that contains your wallet." However, the photo that went along with this claim wasn't taken by Paul Jarvis. It appeared in an 8 February 2016 article about possible electronic pickpocketing in Russia. In any case, "electronic pickpocketing," with or without Point of Sale devices, remained rare as of 2016, but RFID sleeves for cards remained readily available for those with lingering concerns. claim article available Last updated:  17 February 2016     Sources:   Noll, Scott.  "Electronic Pickpocketing."   WREG-TV [Memphis].  3 December 2010.     Noll, Scott.  "Electronic Pickpocketing Goes Viral."   WREG-TV [Memphis].  6 December 2010.     Schwartz, John.  "Researchers See Privacy Pitfalls in No-Swipe Credit Cards."   The New York Times.  23 October 2006.     Vamosi, Robert.  "RFID-Enabled Credit Card Theft."   CNET.com.  27 October 2006.     KKCO-TV [Grand Junction, CO].  "Protecting Your Identity Against Credit Card Hackers."   15 May 2012. Claim:  E-mail reproduces comedian Bill Cosby's platform as a write-in candidate in an upcoming presidential election. INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example:  [Collected via e-mail, July 2008] 0I HAVE DECIDED TO BECOME A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE.  HERE IS MY PLATFORM: ( 1.)  Press 1 for English is immediately banned.  English is the official language; speak it or wait at the border until you can. ( 2.)  We will immediately go into a two year isolationist posture to straighten out the country's attitude.  NO imports, no exports.  We will use the 'Walmart' policy, 'If we ain't got it, you don't need it.' ( 3.)  When imports are allowed, there will be a 100% import tax on it.  ( 4.)  All retired military personnel will be required to man one of our many observation towers on the southern border.  (six month tour) They will be under strict orders not to fire on SOUTHBOUND aliens. ( 5.)  Social security  will immediately return to its original state.  If you didn't put nuttin in, you ain't gettin nuttin out.  The president nor any other politician will not be able to touch it. ( 6.)  Welfare - Checks will be handed out on Fridays at the end of the 40 hour school week and the successful completion of urinalysis and a passing grade. ( 7.)  Professional Athletes - Steroids - The FIRST time you check positive you're banned for life. ( 8.)  Crime - We will adopt the Turkish method, the first time you steal, you lose your right hand. There is no more life sentences.  If convicted, you will be put to death by the same method you chose for your victim; gun, knife, strangulation, etc. ( 9.)  One export will be allowed...Wheat.  The world needs to eat.  A bushel of wheat will be the exact price of a barrel of oil. (10.)  All foreign aid using American taxpayer money will immediately cease, and the saved money will pay off the national debt and ultimately lower taxes.  When disasters occur around the world, we'll ask the American people if they want to donate to a disaster fund, and each citizen can make the decision whetherit's a worthy cause. (11.)  The Pledge of Allegiance will be said every day at school and every day in Congress. (12.)  The National Anthem will be played at all appropriate ceremonies, sporting events, outings, etc. Sorry if I stepped on anyone's toes, but a vote for me will get you better than what you have, and better than what you're gonna get.  Thanks for listening, and remember to write in my name on the ballot in November. God Bless America!!!!!!!!!!! Bill Cosby!!!!!!!! Origins:   This piece setting out a hypothetical reactionary "platform" for a potential write-in U.S. presidential candidate was originally circulated prior to the 2008 elections and commonly attributed to entertainer  Bill Cosby.  Although the identity of the original author remains unknown, this piece is most assuredly not the work of the popular comedian:  When Dr. Cosby speaks out politically, it is generally to urge blacks to take responsibility for making the most of educational opportunities and eschewing choices that limit their potential for success.  Immigration, imports, foreign aid, steroid use in sports, and insufficient recitation of the Pledge of Allegiance and the national anthem are not his political btes noires.  (This "platform" has also been attributed to comic George Carlin, and it's equally out of tune with that late comedian's commonly expressed political views.) Bill Cosby speaks out Just before the 2008 U.S. presidential election, Bill Cosby himself disclaimed involvement with this "write-in candidate" e-mail on his web site: BILL COSBY IS NOT A WRITE-IN CANDIDATE FOR PRESIDENTI am not a write-in candidate for President. The statement purportedly from me stating that I am a candidate is a hoax. The platform attributed to me (and at various times to Robin Williams, Andy Rooney and George Carlin) does not represent my views and in many respects is abhorrent to me. Apparently those bloggers and websites who continue to spread this hoax do not care to do even minimal fact checking. This piece has continued to circulate well beyond the 2008 elections and has since been updated to suggest that it is a platform for a potential candidate in the upcoming 2012 elections, a change which prompted the posting of yet another disclaimer on Dr. Cosby's site in September 2009: disclaimer Whatever I say is on Twitter, Facebook or BillCosby.com A viral email is appearing on the internet purporting to be a Bill Cosby statement that he is running for President of the United States in 2012 and outlining his platform. This is a hoax, completely false and with no factual basis. Bill Cosby says, "False Bill Cosby statements are not funny nor fun and sometimes mean-spirited." Last updated:  25 September 2010 In his bid to take the seat of Texas retiring U.S. senator, businessman Tom Leppert draws on his private-sector background plus nearly four years as mayor of Dallas that ended in February 2011.When I came in, the biggest challenge was in public safety -- the crime rate, Leppert said in a Jan. 12, 2012, debate held in Austin for the Republican candidates vying to replace Sen. Kay Bailey Hutchison. In the space of the three years, 08, 09 and 10, we brought the crime rate down by 30 percent -- numbers any city would love to have. And the way we did it is we increased the police department by 20 percent.We wondered if the rate fell that much -- and if Leppert is justified in taking credit.Leppert spokesman Daniel Keylin told us by email that Dallas crime rate dropped from 78.45 crimes per 1,000 residents in 2007 to 55.67 crimes per 1,000 in 2010, a decrease of 29 percent.Keylin sent us a 2010Dallas police reportwith those numbers and others, including a chart that shows the crime rate per 1,000 residents from 1970 through 2010. The crimes counted are the FBIs index crimes: murder, rape, robbery, aggravated assault, burglary, larceny theft and motor vehicle theft.But the rate started dropping several years before Leppert became mayor in June 2007.After hovering for several years at around 93 crimes per 1,000 residents, the rate declined in 2004 and each subsequent year through 2010 -- with the rates falling more steeply each year after 2007, according to the department. The 2010 rate of 55.67 crimes per 1,000 was a 30-year low. (Clickhereto view the chart.) A caveat: Comparing the rates before 2007 to those after 2007 is complicated because Dallas police changed how some crimes were reported.The post-2007 declines track with crime tallies that the Dallas Police Department reports to the FBI.Next, we asked Leppert what steps he took or contributed to toward the rate reductions.Keylin told us that increasing the number of Dallas police officers was a main goal in Lepperts 2007 mayoral campaign. Soon after his election, Leppert held a City Council retreat during which he advocated expanding the force, Keylin said, and during Lepperts tenure, the council allocated money in each of four budgets to hire a total 679 additional officers. Keylin also cited the addition of 176 squad cars.Dallas Morning News stories fromJanuaryandMarch2011 indicate the force had around 2,860 officers in 2000, 2,900 police in 2006, and 3,684 officers at the end of 2010.The Dallas police sent us figures for net job gains and losses that reflect a considerable increase in hiring during Lepperts tenure. In 2003-2004, the force saw small losses; then, small gains in net jobs came in 2005-2006. Large gains came in 2007-2010: 168, 203, 208 and 93 net jobs, respectively (after retirement and other departures are subtracted from the number of hires). In 2011  after Lepperts exit  the Dallas police lost 179 positions.We consulted other sources before circling back to Leppert.According to a July 25, 2007, Morning News article, public safety was a big part of Lepperts 2007 mayoral bid and of the post-election council retreat he called. However, the article says lowering the crime rate and adding police were already established city priorities.Shortly before Leppert took office, the News reported that city manager Mary Suhm had drawn up a preliminary budget proposal to hire 200 police officers in each of the next four years. In thatJune 18, 2007, news story, Mayor-elect Leppert calls the plan a good start.In a telephone interview, Dallasmayor pro tem for 2007-09, Elba Garcia, told us that from at least 2004 on, there was unanimous consensus among council members that reducing crime was a priority. Garcia, initially elected to the council in 2001, chaired the councils public safety committee. A Democrat, she isnowa Dallas County commissioner.Garcia said of the crime rate reductions: It took the leadership of many people, and the mayor (Leppert) wasnt there when we started that crime decrease.The News reported July 30, 2003 that the city was headed towards its sixth year with the highest crime rate for cities of over 1 million residents as gauged by a national report. Amid public dismay, Mayor Laura Miller met with federal and county officials, and began meeting weekly with police Chief Terrell Bolton, according to the paper, as one council member called for an outside review of the department.Bolton was fired less than a month later -- partly because of the crime ranking, the paper reported. Under the new chief, David Kunkle, who took the post in 2004, crime rates went down and public trust in the police went up, the News wrote in aJan. 26, 2011, story.In 2005, two local leaders cited concern over the citys crime ranking when they founded Safer Dallas, Better Dallas, a nonprofit group that sought private donations to support Dallas police. That year, they garnered a$15 million giftfrom the W.W. Caruth, Jr. Foundation Fund, used to start apolice leadership academyandpurchasepolice equipment,accordingto the Dallas Morning News.Garcia told us that at the July 2007 council retreat, the council vowed to get Dallas out of the No. 1 spot on the big-city-crime list -- a goalachievedin 2009 (and Dallas dropped from No. 2 to No. 3 the next year).The Morning Newssaid in a blog post Oct. 19, 2010: To get out of the top spots, the city has substantially increased the size of its police force.In aJan. 8, 2011, Morning News storyabout the Dallas crime rates steady march downward that started seven years ago, the paper said police credit factors from public surveillance cameras to specialized crime reduction operations to the addition of 750 officers since 2004.We wondered how to isolate Lepperts contributions to the rate decrease on his watch.In a telephone interview, Leppert acknowledged that Dallas leaders had been talking for years about adding police. But, he said, It wasnt until I came in that we said, We are going to do it. This is going to be absolutely a commitment to it. There was never a commitment to a long-term effort to do it, and they never looked at the way that you finance it, and we did all of those things, he said. For those police hires, Leppert said, the city made a fundamental shifting of resources to public safety, a claim we couldnt immediately confirm.There were a lot of people involved in this. I clearly led the effort, he said. We worked together, and we made it happen. And I understood where we had to go.Still, its not clear how much Leppert directly influenced the police force increase that occurred on his watch.One criminologist told us it takes sustained effort to turn around a citys crime rate. Speaking to the Dallas turnaround, Melinda Schlager at Texas A&M University-Commerce said in a telephone interview: Many of the seeds for change were planted under Kunkle, the chief who served from June 2004 through May 2010, and if you look at when the decreases in crime began, they began under Kunkles watch.Dallas three-year, 29-percent rate drop seems high, but plausible, criminologists told us, noting that national and state crime rates also dropped. From 2007 to 2010, basically Lepperts time as mayor, Texas saw an 8 percent drop instatewideFBI index crimes, andnationwidethe decline was 10.7 percent; Houston saw a 11.4 percent drop over the same years, Austin a 9.4 percent drop. San Antonios rate rose and fell, but the city ended with a net gain of 0.1 percent for the period.Garcia said of Lepperts 30-percent debate statement: Im glad he used the word we.... All that took a lot of people supporting these recommendations, supporting the chief ... It took a lot of people and a lot of leadership.We asked Leppert if its possible the crime rate would have fallen at a similar pace anyway, considering it was going down before he became mayor and continued to drop after his tenure. If they did the same things we did, he said. I needed the city council, I needed to work with the police department; not only the leaders in the police department but the people who were out on the street doing a great job every single day.Our rulingLepperts estimate of a 30-percent, three-year drop is on target, though crime was dropping years before his tenure and factors beyond his influence surely contributed to the drop he touts --  among them private donations before he was mayor and the earlier hiring of a new police chief. Yet the police force grew substantially on his watch. We rate his statement Mostly True. On 18 February 2016, the Facebook page "I Acknowledge Class Warfare Exists" posted a meme featuring a photograph of Papa John's CEO John Schnatter along with a quote ostensibly uttered by him about not sharing company profits with employees:   Although several web sites, such as AZ Quotes, Sherman's Wilderness, and the Straight Dopemessage board,have attributed this phrase to Schnatter, none of these web sites conclusively documents where or when Schnatter purportedly made this statement. In fact, our attempt to source this quote led us through a never-ending circle of memes; in the end, we found no record in any credible publication linking Schnatter to these words. AZ Quotes Sherman's Wilderness Straight Dope The quote was likely created in an attempt to paraphrase comments the Papa John's CEOmade in 2012, just before the implementation of the Affordable Care Act: comments "Our best estimate is that the Obamacare will cost 11 to 14 cents per pizza, or 15 to 20 cents per order from a corporate basis. "We're not supportive of Obamacare, like most businesses in our industry. But our business model and unit economics are about as ideal as you can get for a food company to absorb Obamacare. "If Obamacare is in fact not repealed, we will find tactics to shallow out any Obamacare costs and core strategies to pass that cost onto consumers in order to protect our shareholders best interest." In November 2012, Schnatter wrote an op-ed piecefor the Huffington Post, maintaining that some of his comments had been taken out of context. piece Item:  Texas doctor pens opinion piece about the treatment of prisoners captured in Afghanistan. Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2002] I was just reading Yahoo news and the San Antonio Express newspaper. You know what upsets me?  People with absolutely nothing to do with their lives, so they complain on how the U.S.  is treating the prisoners or "Detainees" from Afghanistan. Do you know why they are complaining?  They see a picture on the news or the Internet and they see someone who is shackled and blindfolded and walking with two armed guards behind razor wire.  This picture tells them they are treated unfairly. Here is what I see . . . I see a thin, sickly looking person who under severe mental duress from being bombed, was cleaned up, given a haircut to prevent infestation of parasites, and given new clothes and shoes to wear.  I see a person who is given three nutritious meals per day and a bed to sleep in a tropical climate, not the cold desert floor of Afghanistan, eating worms, bugs, and goat.  I see a person who will be able to get relief from their pains and illnesses without paying a dime for medical expenses.  They will get rest, educated, and their mental stress levels will have dropped tremendously because they were taken out of a combat area and will not be shot at again. I see these people blindfolded and shackled behind razor wire.  I have the intellectual ability to understand why they are this way.  For those that do not have this ability, let me explain it to you.  They are blindfolded to protect OUR U.S. SOLDIERS from further harm.  These people can not plan to destroy something if they can not see it.  They are shackled because these same people have proven they will easily give up their lives to kill just ONE AMERICAN.  We are protecting their life as well as our own.  The razor wire is a mental deterrent, just like the little alarm company warning signs most of you out there have on your home, but don't have the actual alarm system.  You would think many times over before actually trying to cross that razor wire.  For all of you people out there thinking how bad these poor detainees have it under such strict guard, you need to do a lot more thinking about other things in your life. I was born on September 11th, 1966, and every birthday I have from now on will never be a happy one.  Why, do you ask?  Because as I am out somewhere trying to have a nice dinner, someone will have a candle or a ribbon or something, crying about the anniversary of a national tragedy. And then I will think, about how insignificant my one little birthday actually is compared to everything else that had happened on that one day. It boggles my mind that there are actually people out there in this world, in leadership positions, head of companies that actually think that we are doing something wrong when it comes to protecting our nation and our people.  These same people will be the first ones to complain about something that happens to them when they are vacationing outside this country.  They will ask why the U.S.  does not do anything about their misfortune. These are the same people that complain about taxes and how bad their lives actually are. If you receive this email, please pass it on to everyone in your address book.  I am not afraid or ashamed to speak my peace.  I am an American, my father fought for this country, and was willing to die for it. Dr.  Steven TomaselliUvalde, TexasUnited States of America Origins:  This item is another entry difficult to categorize with a simple "true" or "false," as it's merely an opinion piece, not an article asserting any factual claims.  Even though this item was not written by an established journalist or published as an editorial in any newspaper (even as a letter to the editor), it has been circulated widely because a great many people seem to give anything authored by someone identified by the title of "Dr." a good deal of unwarranted credibility.   If the good Dr. Steven Tomaselli holds that title because he has earned a doctorate in a field such as political science, his opinions might be expected to offer informative insights; if he's a dentist or a mathematics professor, there's no real reason to expect his opinions to be more noteworthy than those of millions of other citizens.  (For the record, "Dr." Tomaselli is a chiropractor.) chiropractor As of mid-February 2002, the Taliban and al-Qaeda prisoners (or "detainees") held in Camp X-ray at the U.S. naval base in Guantanamo Bay, Cuba, numbered 220.  The U.S. drew criticism from representatives of European nations and human rights organizations such as the International Committee of the Red Cross for maintaining that captured Taliban and al-Qaeda soldiers did not qualify for prisoner of war status under the Geneva Convention, and for asserting that the captives were being treated humanely while nonetheless denying the Red Cross permission to visit the  camp.   The issue at the heart of the dispute has been the application of Geneva Convention treaties, which provide international safeguards for the humane treatment of battlefield captives.  The United States asserted that under the terms of the 1949 agreement, to which the U.S. was a signatory, Taliban soldiers did not qualify as prisoners of war because they wore no uniforms or insignia, nor did they have an organized command structure established according to the "laws and customs" of war.  Al-Qaeda combatants were even further removed from this classification, the U.S.stated, because they operated in different countries and targeted civilians as well as military forces, and lumping all these captives into one "prisoner of war" category would blur important distinctions between legitimate national military forces and armed terrorist groups.   (Granting captives POW status entitles them to additional legal rights, such as the right to legal representation; the right to respond to interrogation by providing no more than name, rank, and serial number, and the right to be sent home when military hostilities have ceased.) The International Committee of the Red Cross in Switzerland said it considered both the Taliban and al-Qaeda fighters held by U.S. forces to be prisoners of war under  revisions made to the Geneva Convention treaties in 1977, although those revisions were never ratified by either the United States or Afghanistan. The Geneva Convention treaties also state that "should any doubt arise" about the status of captives, "such persons shall enjoy the protection of the present convention until such time as their status has been determined by a competent tribunal," and human rights organizations and European nations criticized the U.S. government for refusing to hold such a tribunal.  They were also critical of the treatment some of the captives were reportedly receiving, including being blindfolded, sedated, and held in metal cages.  revisions On Thursday, 7 February 2002, the Bush administration modified its position and announced that it would apply Geneva Convention rules to Taliban detainees, although it refused to offer the same treatment to al-Qaeda fighters and continued to decline categorizing either group as prisoners of war.  It also allowed Red Cross representatives to visit at Camp X-ray to review the conditions there and interview some of the detainees held there, and it implemented some of the recommendations (allowed prisoners to talk more freely among themselves, changing meal times to allow for earlier prayers, allowing prisoners more exercise) made by those representatives.  (The relaxation of some of the stricter rules regarding prisoners might also have been a by-product of the fact that newer arrivals were generally less dangerous than those who had been captured earlier.) Last updated:  15 April 2008    Sources:   Aurora, Chris.  "Hicks Allowed to Talk with Fellow Prisoners."   The [Sydney] Daily Telegraph.  12 February 2002  (p. 21).     Becker, Elizabeth.  "Red Cross Man in Guantanamo: A 'Busybody,' but Not Unwelcome."   The New York Times.   20 February 2002  (p. A10).     Bender, Bryan.  "Red Cross Disputes U.S. Stance on Detainees."   The Boston Globe.   9 February 2002  (p. A1).