Does Amazon Station Paramedics at Hot Warehouses Rather Than Install Air Conditioning?
On 15 August 2015, the New York Times published an in-depth, widely discussed piece about online retailing giant Amazon.com titled "Inside Amazon: Wrestling Big Ideas in a Bruising Workplace" (subtitled "The company is conducting an experiment in how far it can push white-collar workers to get them to achieve its ever-expanding ambitions").   The Times' article focused renewed attention on Amazon.com for its perennially controversial labor practices. An Allentown Morning Call article titled "Inside Amazon's Warehouse" written by Spencer Soper and published on 18 September 2011 had covered much of the same territory: article Elmer Goris spent a year working in Amazon.com's Lehigh Valley warehouse, where books, CDs and various other products are packed and shipped to customers who order from the world's largest online retailer. The 34-year-old Allentown resident, who has worked in warehouses for more than 10 years, said he quit in July because he was frustrated with the heat and demands that he work mandatory overtime. Working conditions at the warehouse got worse earlier this year, especially during summer heat waves when heat in the warehouse soared above 100 degrees, he said. He got light-headed, he said, and his legs cramped, symptoms he never experienced in previous warehouse jobs. One hot day, Goris said, he saw a co-worker pass out at the water fountain. On other hot days, he saw paramedics bring people out of the warehouse in wheelchairs and on stretchers. During summer heat waves, Amazon arranged to have paramedics parked in ambulances outside, ready to treat any workers who dehydrated or suffered other forms of heat stress. Those who couldn't quickly cool off and return to work were sent home or taken out in stretchers and wheelchairs and transported to area hospitals. And new applicants were ready to begin work at any time. Clearly, interest in a 2015 expos on Amazon's treatment of white-collar workers revived interest in a 2011 story on Amazon  blue-collar (often temporary) workers. The outcome of the overheated workers scenario described in the above-quoted excerpt was also addressed in a Reuters op-ed published on 17 June 2015: 2011 published Meanwhile, Amazon's treatment of warehouse workers has been under scrutiny since 2011, when an investigation by the Allentown Morning Call newspaper revealed what were  quite literally  sweatshop conditions. When summer temperatures exceeded 100 degrees inside the company's Breinigsville, Pennsylvania, warehouse, managers would not open the loading bay doors for fear of theft. Instead, they hired paramedics to wait outside in ambulances, ready to extract heat-stricken employees on stretchers and in wheelchairs, the investigation found. Workers also said they were pressured to meet ever-greater production targets, a strategy colloquially known as "management by stress." Amazon declined to answer the newspaper's specific questions about working conditions in the warehouse but, eight months after the story was released, company officials announced that they'd spent $52 million to retrofit warehouses with air conditioning. The New York Times article also revisited that earlier controversy: In Amazon warehouses, employees are monitored by sophisticated electronic systems to ensure they are packing enough boxes every hour. (Amazon came under fire in 2011 when workers in an eastern Pennsylvania warehouse toiled in more than 100-degree heat with ambulances waiting outside, taking away laborers as they fell. After an investigation by the local newspaper, the company installed air-conditioning.) The Morning Call reiterated that issue in a 17 August 2015 article: article In the case of the Pennsylvania warehouse, after The Morning Call published an in-depth look at the appalling conditions the company spent $52 million adding air conditioners there and at other facilities around the country. It had been mistreating low-wage workers who had few options, and it deserved to be shamed into changing its behavior. While Amazon was widely criticized in 2011 (and afterwards) for heat conditions in a Pennsylvania warehouse, the company has since installed air conditioning at that warehouse and several other facilities.
Claim:  Dynamic Pet Products Real Ham Bone have caused several dogs to fall ill and die. UNPROVEN Example:  [Collected via Facebook, March 2015] I started this Face book page in 2010. I lost my beautiful Black Labrador retriever on 3/8/2010. He ate one of these bones and it broke into sharp shards and punctured his bowel. I took the rest back to Same Club and the manager said he wouldn't sell them anymore. Sad to say not true. The FDA investigation is going on supposedly , but I hear beings its a pet "treat" they won't or can't do nothing. Sad to hear people are still losing there pets , 5 years and counting since I lost Sammie. Hopefully someday these heartless bastards will stop looking at $$$ and cease making them. RIP Sammie.  I purchased a Real Ham Bone made by Dynamic Pet Products, from Wal-Mart on Sunday 3/1/15. I gave it to Fred, our bassett hound, he chewed on it and ingested some. By Monday morning 3/2/15, he was vomiting and having severe diarrhea. By the afternoon, he was bleeding out of his rectum and we rushed him to the vet. He was put in intensive care and we were told he was so sick, the vet recommended we put him to sleep. I am never going to forgive myself for buying him that deadly treat. Please share this so others don't make the same mistake I did. DYNAMIC PET PRODUCTS (in Missouri) know they've killed dozens of dogs and they still sell them at big retail companies like Sam's Club and Wal-Mart.   Origins:   On 4 March 2015, Facebook user Khristie Collins-Reed published the above-displayed photographs to  Facebook  Facebook following the death of her family's basset hound, Fred. Both on Facebook and in an interview with a local news station, members of her family stated that Fred had received a Dynamic Pet Products Real Ham Bone on 1 March 2015 and died the following day.   The family's story was not the first complaint lodged about Dynamic Pet Products Real Ham Bone. Several negative reviews had been published to consumer complaint sites, spanning several years and alleging problems similar to those reported by Reed's family. (Additional warnings have circulated among animal lovers on social media sites about canine jerky  treats and other forms of pet chew treats.) reviews jerky chew As early as 2010, U.S. the Food and Drug Administration (FDA) had investigated Dynamic Pet Products Real Ham Bone following consumer complaints, and at that time a disclaimer about the product displayed on the manufacturer's web site stated that: investigated Not recommended for aggressive chewers  we recommend they eat a Beef Bone. As with all natural bones, we recommend supervision during eating. The FDA did not issue a specific warning about Dynamic Pet Products Real Ham Bone at that time, but the agency did issue a general warning against bones as chew toys in 2010. According to the FDA, rectal bleeding, intestinal blockage, and broken teeth were among the adverse outcomes linked to bones: bones "Some people think it's safe to give dogs large bones, like those from a ham or a roast," says Carmela Stamper, D.V.M., a veterinarian in the Center for Veterinary Medicine at the Food and Drug Administration. "Bones are unsafe no matter what their size. Giving your dog a bone may make your pet a candidate for a trip to your veterinarian's office later, possible emergency surgery, or even death." "Make sure you throw out bones from your own meals in a way that your dog can't get to them," adds Stamper, who suggests taking the trash out right away or putting the bones up high and out of your dog's reach until you have a chance to dispose of them. "And pay attention to where your dog's nose is when you walk him around the neighborhood  steer him away from any objects lying in the grass." Veterinarians who treated Fred before his death in March 2015 said they weren't sure whether Dynamic Pet Products Real Ham Bone was to blame: Fred was in such bad shape when they took him to California Veterinary Specialists in Carlsbad that the family said their goodbyes and put him down. The veterinarians [said] they did not have a definitive answer about what made Fred ill because the family could not afford to run the tests. The family seems certain the bone broke apart and ripped apart Fred's insides. Dynamic Pet Products released a statement in response to the claims advising dog owners to supervise pets with any treats or snacks. According to the FDA, bones are generally unsafe for dogs and should not be given as treats. Last updated:  9 March 2015     Von Lunen, Jacques.  "FDA Looks Into Maker of Real Ham Bones Treats for Dogs After Complaints."   Oregon Live.  15 March 2010. Claim:  A 2013 immigration reform bill provides young people with free cars to transport them to their jobs.   Example:  [Collected via e-mail, June 2013] BREAKING: Immigration bill now includes free cars (at tax payer expense) for young people to help them get to work! LIKE if you agree: The Senate should vote no on this Gang of 8 immigration bill! Call and let them know what you think! (888) 978-3134  Fox News reported that the riders made to the 2013 Immigration bill now in the Senate that Bernie Sanders has added a provision for free cars, motorcycles or scooters for "young people to use as transportation" to jobs.  This was reported by  Laura Ingraham on Fox and Friends on June 25, 2013.  Is there any truth to this report.  I can not find a copy of the 1,190 page 2013 immigration bill to read it my self Origins:  In April 2013, the Border Security, Economic Opportunity, and Immigration Modernization Act ("a bill to provide for comprehensive immigration reform and for other purposes") was introduced to the U.S. Senate as S.744, sponsored by Democratic Sen. Charles Schumer of New York.  In June 2013 two Republican senators, Bob Corker of Tennessee and John Hoeven of North Dakota, drafted an amendment to that bill (commonly known as the Hoeven-Corker Amendment) in order to, in the words of Senator Corker, "mandate an unprecedented surge of security at the southern border, implement tough interior enforcement to curb de facto amnesty, and help prevent abuse of federal benefits": S.744 Hoeven-Corker Amendment "The Hoeven-Corker amendment takes big and important steps on the immigration issue that matters most: border security," Senator Lamar Alexander said. "It would double the number of agents on the southwest border, construct 700 miles of new or upgraded fencing and spend $3.2 billion on new security technology that was perfected in Iraq and Afghanistan." The Hoeven-Corker amendment would add 20,000 border patrol agents, enough to allow putting one agent every 1,000 feet along the U.S. southwest border. The border patrol agents, fencing and security technology plan would have to be in place before anyone under the immigration legislation's "Registered Provisional Immigrant" program would be allowed to apply for legal permanent residency, otherwise known as a green card. Democratic-affiliated Senator Bernie Sanders of Vermont has been outspokenly critical of the potential economic effects of S.744, arguing that the bill would "allow college students from around the world to take jobs that young Americans would otherwise perform."  In response, he drafted a  Youth Jobs Plan that would "provide $1.5 billion over two years for states and local communities to help find jobs for more than 400,000 16- to 24-year-olds who were hard hit by the Wall Street-caused recession."  That job plan was incorporated into the Hoeven-Corker Amendment under a heading of "TITLE V  JOBS FOR YOUTH." Youth Jobs Plan TITLE V The claim that the immigration bill includes a provision granting "free cars, motorcycles or scooters for young people" stems from a very broad, speculative interpretation of one sentence in the jobs plan portion of the Hoeven-Corker Amendment which generally directs how the job plan funds should be used: IN GENERAL. The funds made available under this section shall be used  (A) to provide summer employment opportunities for low-income youth, with direct linkages to academic and occupational learning, and may be used to provide supportive services, such as transportation or child care, that is necessary to enable the participation of such youth in the opportunities; and  (B) to provide year-round employment opportunities, which may be combined with other activities authorized under section 129 of the Workforce Investment Act of 1998 (29 U.S.C. 17 2854), to low-income youth. As stated, the bill does not contain a specific provision to provide "free cars for young people to help them get to work."  It includes a clause allowing that youth job program funds may be used to "provide supportive services, such as transportation" to low-income youth taking part in summer employment opportunities.  Whether and how that provision would be applied in practice is purely speculative at this point and could vary widely from place to place, potentially ranging anywhere from arranging carpools and subsidizing bus fare to buying, leasing, or renting motor vehicles to be temporarily utilized in ferrying job program participants to work.  But the government isn't going to be buying up cars and turning ownership of them over to young people engaged in summer job programs.       Last updated:  26 June 2013 When the Bureau of Labor Statistics issued its latest job numbers, the Jan. 8, 2021, release brought a jaw-dropping number to light  from November to December the U.S. economy lost 140,000 jobs. Then came another jaw-dropper: As a group, only women lost jobs. Then came this claim, from Wisconsin Treasurer Sarah Godlewski. On Jan. 9, 2021, she tweeted a link to a CNN article about the job losses among women with this comment: This headline is hiding something from you. It wasnt all women that lost jobs, it was mostly Black and Latina women. In fact, white women gained employment. Any response we have to this pandemic and economy has to also address structural inequality. Did Black and Latina women carry the brunt of job loss nationally, while white women gained employment? When asked for a source, Godlewskis office pointed tothe CNN article, dated Jan. 8, that she retweeted. That article noted the U.S. economy lost 140,000 jobs overall, with women losing 156,000 jobs, while men gained 16,000 jobs. Her office also pointed to this paragraph in the article: Black and Latina women disproportionately work in some of the hardest-hit sectors in the pandemic, often in roles thatlack paid sick leaveand the ability to work from home. As schools and day cares closed, many were forced to make hard trade-offs between work and parenting. Those sectors are less likely to have flexibility, so when employers are inflexible or women can't come to work because of caregiving responsibilities  they have to exit the workforce, said Nicole C. Mason, president and CEO of the Institute for Womens Policy Research. We did our own check of the BLS numbers, and the preliminary November and December numbers reflect what was in the CNN article. But Godlewskis claim was specifically on the difference in outcomes for Black and Latina women, as groups, when compared to white women. The BLS conducted a separate survey known as the Current Population Survey, which  measures employment for Black, Hispanic or Latina, and white women ages 20 and older. This data was part of the Jan. 8 release of the December jobs numbers. Participating households respond to the survey in the week of Dec. 6. That data, which is not seasonally adjusted, indicates the number of employed Black women decreased by 82,000 from November to December, and the number of Hispanic or Latina women employed decreased by 31,000. Meanwhile, the number of employed white women increased by 106,000 in the same time span. The overall number of women in the labor force has been fluctuating since the March-to-April numbers, which marked the first full hit of the pandemic. There was a decrease from July to September. Laura Dresser, an economist with the Center on Wisconsin Strategy at the University of Wisconsin-Madison, said prior economic declines were led by male-dominated fields, such as construction and manufacturing. The pandemic-driven decline, she said, has strongly affected areas  such as the restaurant and education industries  with a high number of women workers. And those jobs are low-wage jobs, Dresser said. They're held disproportionately by women. They're held disproportionately by people of color. With a link to a news article, Godlewski claimed: It wasnt all women that lost jobs, it was mostly Black and Latina women. In fact, white women gained employment. Federal statistics show that, as a group, women accounted for all of the job loss from November to December. Whats more, the number of employed white women increased during that time frame, while the numbers for Black and Hispanic or Latina women fell. We rate this claim True. Claim:  The "Cap and Trade energy bill" requires that all existing real estate must meet new energy standards before it can be sold.  Examples:  [Collected via e-mail, November 2009] For those of you who have real estate for sale or rent, be advised that the Cap and Trade energy bill that passed Congress has the following provisions: Before any real estate, new or old, commercial or residential, can be sold or rented, the building must meet the new energy standards set forth in the Bill. These standards are about a general 35% increase in what is now required in building codes. It requires such things as requiring solar reflective roofs, double pane windows, energy efficient appliances and lighting, increased insulation, leak test, and on and on and on. In order to sell or rent any building, you will be required to have a certificate of efficiency issued by a federal building efficiency inspector (new division of the US Dept. of Energy). No certification, no sell or rent, simple as that.  [Collected via e-mail, August 2010] A License Required for your HOUSE? Thinking about selling your house.  Take a look at H.R. 2454 (Cap and Trade bill), that has passed the House of Representatives and being considered by the Senate. Home owners take note & tell your friends and relatives who are home owners! Beginning 1 year after enactment of the Cap and Trade Act, you won't be able to sell your home unless you retrofit it to comply with the energy and water efficiency standards of this Act. H.R. 2454, the "Cap & Trade" bill will be the largest tax increase any of us has ever experienced. The Congressional Budget Office (supposedly non-partisan) estimates that in just a few years the average cost to every family of four will be $6,800 per year. No one is excluded. A year from now you won't be able to sell your house. The caveat is, that if you have enough money to make required major upgrades to your home, then you can sell it. But, if not, then forget it. Even pre-fabricated homes ("mobile homes") are included. In effect, this bill prevents you from selling your home without the permission of the EPA administrator. To get this permission,you will have to have the energy efficiency of your home measured. Cost $200 to start. Then the government will tell you what your new energy efficiency requirement is and you will be forced to make modifications to your home under the retrofit provisions of this Act to comply with the new energy and water efficiency requirements, which easily could cost over $50,000. Then you will have to get your home measured again and get a license (called a "label" in the Act) that must be posted on your property to show what your efficiency rating is; sort of like the Energy Star efficiency rating label on your refrigerator or air conditioner. If you don't get a high enough rating, you can't sell. And, the EPA administrator is authorized to raise the standards every year, even above the automatic energy efficiency increases built into the Act. The EPA administrator, appointed by the President, will run the Cap & Trade program  (AKA the "American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009") and is authorized to make any future changes to the regulations and standards he/she alone determines to be in the government's best interest. Requirements are set low initially so the bill will pass Congress; then the Administrator can set much tougher new standards every year.  The Act itself contains annual required increases in energy efficiency for private and commercial residences and buildings. However, the EPA administrator can set higher standards at any time. Sect. 202 Building Retrofit Program mandates a national retrofit program to increase the energy efficiency of all existing homes across America. The label will be like a license for your car. You will be required to post the label in a conspicuous location in your home and will not be allowed to sell your home without having this label. And, just like your car license, you will probably be required to get a new label every so often - maybe every year. The government estimates the cost of measuring the energy efficiency of your home should only cost about $200 each time. Remember what they said about the auto smog inspections when they first started: that in California it would only cost $15. That was when the program started. Now the cost is about $50 for the inspection and certificate; a 333% increase. Expect the same from the home labeling program. Origins:  HR 2454, the American Clean Energy and Security Act of 2009 (also known as the "cap-and-trade energy bill"), is a bill intended to "create clean energy jobs, achieve energy independence, reduce global warming pollution and transition to a clean energy economy."  The bill was passed by the Houseof Representatives in June 2009, but it has not yet been voted upon by the Senate. HR 2454 The version of the bill passed by the House sets energy efficiency standards benchmarks that must be met by new buildings, both residential and  commercial, constructed after the bill takes effect (i.e., after the bill was passed by both the House and Senate and signed into law).  Contrary to what is claimed above, however, HR 2454 contains no provisions requiring that existing homes "must meet the new energy standards" before they can be re-sold.  Likewise, the bill includes no requirements that an existing residential property undergo an energy usage-related audit or inspection and be assigned a "certificate of efficiency issued by a federal building efficiency inspector" before it can be re-sold or rented. This misinformation about mandatory energy standard retrofits and licensing requirements has been promulgated primarily through a misunderstanding of Section 202 of HR 2454, which is headed "Building Retrofit Program" and calls for the establishment of "standards for a national energy and environmental building retrofit policy."  However, those standards are specifically indicated as being part of the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance (REEP) program, a program intended to establish state programs to provide cash incentives to property owners who voluntarily choose to make their buildings more energy efficient.   REEP The House Energy and Commerce Committee, who has jurisdiction over the implementation of cap-and-trade legislation, notes in their section-by-section explanation of HR 2454 that Section 202: explanation Establishes the Retrofit for Energy and Environmental Performance program to provide allowances to states to conduct cost-effective building retrofits. Provides that states may use local governments or other agencies or entities to carry out the work and may use flexible forms of financial assistance providing up to 50% of the costs of retrofits, with funding increasing in proportion to efficiency achievement. Provides additional assistance for the retrofitting of historic buildings. Directs the Administrator of EPA to establish standards and guidelines for the program, in consultation with the Secretary of DOE. Allows federal funds provided to disaster victims to qualify as a building owner's contribution toward matching requirements. Requires states to offer preferential access to at least 10% of dedicated program funding to public and assisted housing. Nothing would require a homeowner to audit or retrofit their home to ensure that it meets building code requirements. The National Association of Realtors (NAR) also noted of that section of HR 2454:  NAR [HR 2454] does not require that buildings be retrofitted. Rather, it provides federal funding for states to offer financial incentives, such as loans or grants, for property owners to voluntarily decide to improve energy efficiency. In order to receive the funding, there are conditions on how states can spend the money, such as verification of energy improvements performed by private contractors, but that is only to ensure that taxpayer dollars are actually spent on the purpose for which it is intended (building efficiency improvements). There is no point-of-sale guideline or any other requirement of any sort in the House passed bill. Nowhere does this bill create a federal requirement that a property owner would have to retrofit a property to any guideline at any time  let alone at point of sale. The bill does stipulate federal guidelines to ensure that states spend and verify that bill funding goes to financial incentives for property owners to voluntarily make improvements. An entirely separate bill would have to be drafted, introduced, passed by committees and both houses of Congress, and signed by the President into law in order for the Federal government to go beyond [HR 2454's] financial incentives for voluntary energy improvements. Last updated:  7 September 2010 <!--    Ellen, Daryn.  "Guide to Tipping."   O, The Oprah Magazine.  December 2002. On 24 August 2016, the discredited food alarmist known as "Food Babe" posted an image showing the ingredient list on a box of Cheez-It brand snack crackers, along with the claim that the product contains TBHQ, a "toxic synthetic preservative created from butane": discredited Food Babe  Are you buying these? You cant get much more toxic than TBHQ. This synthetic preservative is created from butane (a very toxic gas) and has been linked to vision disturbances, liver enlargement, childhood behavioral problems, and stomach cancer in animal studies. New research coming out of Michigan State University links it to the rise in food allergies, which has prompted more research. Although the FDA allows this in America, this additive is banned for use in food in other countries including Japan, and is on the Center For Science in The Public Interests list as one of the worst additives to be avoided in our food. Please share! #FoodBabeArmy TBHQ, tertiary butylhydroquinone, is a synthetic antioxidant that is commonly used as a food preservative. Although TBHQ does contain a butyl moiety, this does not mean that the preservative is "created from butane" (which is commonly used as lighter fluid). In response to a similar claim made in 2007 about McDonald's Chicken McNuggets, the ScienceBlogs web site explained TBHQ's relationship to butane: ScienceBlogs TBHQ contains a butyl moiety (a tert-butyl moiety, more accurately), but so does butter, which contains esters of the blameless butyrate (when degraded to free butyrate, its the origin of the smell of rancid butter, esterified, as in fresh butter, its not a problem). Butter is not lighter fluid, nor is TBHQ. A butyl group does not butane make. Its worth noting that preservatives might not be entirely benign (you also encounter BHT and BHA, your cereal boxs cardboard is probably impregnated with one of these). However, none of these are lighter fluid by a long shot. While it's true that TBHQ has been banned in Japan, it is not "toxic," as the FDA and the European Food Safety Authority both classify TBHQ as a safe food additive in the small amounts present in foods such as Cheez-It snack crackers. FDA European Food Safety Authority In response to the message posted by "Food Babe," Cheez-It stated on their Facebook page that they have been testing natural alternatives to TBHQ:  While synthetic preservatives may not be the healthiest of options, TBHQ is not "created from butane," it is not "toxic, nor is it been deemed by the FDA to be dangerous to consume in moderate quantities. On 3 May 2018, the "Occupy Democrats" Facebook page posted a meme which claimed that the president had violated the constitutional separation of church and state by setting up a "religious office": meme   President Trump did sign an executive order in May 2018 to establish a new faith-based initiative within the White House, but nobody from his administration called it a "religious office"  that description appears to have come from Occupy Democrats.  Furthermore, Trump's initiative represents significant continuity of, rather than a departure from, the previous two administrations. Although every detail and working of the new initiative has not yet been outlined, it certainly does not represent a radical change. Trump's White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative bears a striking resemblance to the White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, which George W. Bush set up in 2001, and which Barack Obama continued during his administration but renamed the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships.  set up renamed In brief, Trump's executive order  which he signed on 3 May 2018, the National Day of Prayer  replaces the White House Office of Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships with the White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative, keeping it within the Executive Office of the President of the United States.  executive order The executive order also sets out the following: Beyond that, Trump's order is somewhat vague on the exact workings of the initiative and the duties of the advisor who will lead it: One potentially significant provision in the executive order calls for those in charge of the Faith and Opportunity Initiative to contact the Attorney General if they see potential executive branch violations of a religious liberty memorandum published by Attorney General Jeff Sessions in October 2017.  The Sessions memorandum reiterated the positions set out by Trump in an earlier executive order, in which the President wrote: memorandum executive order It shall be the policy of the executive branch to vigorously enforce Federal laws robust protections for religious freedom.... All executive departments and agencies (agencies) shall, to the greatest extent practicable and to the extent permitted by law, respect and protect the freedom of persons and organizations to engage in religious and political speech.  President Trump has prioritized enhancing legal protections for religious freedom, including when it comes to obligations placed on faith-based organizations that receive federal funding, the freedom of employers and employees to abstain from practices (particularly in health care) which they feel compromise their religious beliefs, and in calling for an end to the Johnson Amendment, a long-standing provision that bars religious 501 (c)(3) non-profit groups from engaging in electoral activism. prioritized provision In his 2001 executive order establishing the Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives, President George W. Bush emphasized that a driving force behind the policy was a desire to "level the playing field" in the disbursement of federal funding, and enhance the funding opportunities available for religious non-profit organizations  especially those focused on poverty, addiction, crime and other social issues: executive order The paramount goal is compassionate results, and private and charitable community groups, including religious ones, should have the fullest opportunity permitted by law to compete on a level playing field, so long as they achieve valid public purposes, such as curbing crime, conquering addiction, strengthening families and neighborhoods, and overcoming poverty. This delivery of social services must be results oriented and should value the bedrock principles of pluralism, nondiscrimination, evenhandedness, and neutrality. The Occupy Democrats meme is largely accurate. In May 2018, Trump did indeed establish an initiative within the White House which would give faith-based organizations what the administration called a "voice in the White House." However, the description of the initiative as a "religious office" did not come from the Trump administration itself, and that is not its official name. called Furthermore, Trump's 2018 initiative represents significant continuity from predecessor offices set up by George W. Bush in 2001 and Barack Obama in 2009, although the exact focus, workings, and influence of Trump's initiative remain to be seen. On 5 May, the "Being Liberal" Facebook page and web site published an article with the headline "Trump quietly signed an Executive Order allowing government to fund religious groups." article This is very misleading, and ignores the fact that the federal government has been providing grants, funding and tax write-offs to religious non-profit organizations for many years, including during the Obama administration. Trump's creation of the White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative did not usher in that state of affairs.  Bush, President George W. "Executive Order 13199 -- Establishment of White House Office of Faith-Based and Community Initiatives."
 The American Presidency Project/UCSB. 29 January 2001. Obama, President Barack. "Executive Order 13498 -- Amendments to Executive Order 13199 and Establishment of the President's Advisory Council for Faith-Based and Neighborhood Partnerships."
 Federal Register. 5 February 2009. Trump, President Donald J. "Executive Order on the Establishment of a White House Faith and Opportunity Initiative."
 White House. 3 May 2018. Sessions, Jeff. "Memorandum for All Executive Departments and Agencies -- Federal Law Protections for Religious Liberty."
 Office of the U.S. Attorney General. 6 October 2017. Trump, President Donald J. "Presidential Executive Order Promoting Free Speech and Religious Liberty."
 White House. 4 May 2017. White House. "Fact Sheet -- President Donald J. Trump Stands Up for Religious Freedom In the United States."
 White House. 3 May 2018. Updated [8 May 2018]: Added examination of "Being Liberal" article. Urban Legends Reference Pages: Inboxer Rebellion (DarkProfits)  Claim:  Your credit card has been used to place an order with DarkProfits.com.  .Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003]Origins:  This spammed message  warning recipients that DarkProfits.com has received an "order made by using your personal credit card information"  is not really a scam but merely another in a series of pranks directed at the DarkProfits web site.  No charges have been placed on anyone's cards. This item is just one more "joe job" prank (an attempt to pin blame on an uninvolved third party by forging messages in their name) intended to get people riled up at DarkProfits.com.DarkProfits has been targeted by other "joe jobs"  a September 2003 mailing that offered all manner of illegal goods for sale, and one that appeared in January 2004 that announced the recipient's credit card had been charged $149.95 by DarkProfits.com for "1 Month Child Porn Unlimited Online Access."  Both of these were just more of the same leg pull.Last updated:  30 January 2004   .Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003]Origins:  This spammed message  warning recipients that DarkProfits.com has received an "order made by using your personal credit card information"  is not really a scam but merely another in a series of pranks directed at the DarkProfits web site.  No charges have been placed on anyone's cards. This item is just one more "joe job" prank (an attempt to pin blame on an uninvolved third party by forging messages in their name) intended to get people riled up at DarkProfits.com.DarkProfits has been targeted by other "joe jobs"  a September 2003 mailing that offered all manner of illegal goods for sale, and one that appeared in January 2004 that announced the recipient's credit card had been charged $149.95 by DarkProfits.com for "1 Month Child Porn Unlimited Online Access."  Both of these were just more of the same leg pull.Last updated:  30 January 2004 Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2003]  Origins:  This spammed message  warning recipients that DarkProfits.com has received an "order made by using your personal credit card information"  is not really a scam but merely another in a series of pranks directed at the DarkProfits web site.   No charges have been placed on anyone's cards. This item is just one more "joe job" prank (an attempt to pin blame on an uninvolved third party by forging messages in their name) intended to get people riled up at DarkProfits.com. joe job DarkProfits has been targeted by other "joe jobs"  a September 2003 mailing that offered all manner of illegal goods for sale, and one that appeared in January 2004 that announced the recipient's credit card had been charged $149.95 by DarkProfits.com for "1 Month Child Porn Unlimited Online Access."  Both of these were just more of the same leg pull. illegal goods Child Porn Last updated:  30 January 2004 After the police shooting of 20-year-old Latrell Allen in Chicago's Englewood community on the afternoon of Aug. 9, 2020, unrest in that city extended through that night and into the early morning hours of the following day, with looters hitting some stores in Chicagos wealthiest shopping district on North Michigan Avenue. Latrell Allen extended The following evening, members of the Black Lives Matter (BLM) movement held a solidarity rally in that city with some of the people who had been arrested for looting the night before. Shortly after those events, social media users began circulating a meme stemming from that event, quoting a "BLM leader & organizer" named Ariel Atkins as saying, "I don't care if someone decides to loot, because that makes sure that person eats or has clothes. Anything they want to take, they can, because these businesses have insurance":  That was an accurate quote, according to Chicago NBC affiliate WMAQ-TV, who reported on the Aug. 10 event: reported Members of Black Lives Matter held a solidarity rally on Monday night [August 10] with the more than 100 individuals who were arrested after a night of looting and unrest in Chicago. The rally was held at the South Loop police station where organizers say those individuals are currently being held in custody. I dont care if someone decides to loot a Gucci or a Macys or a Nike store, because that makes sure that person eats, Ariel Atkins, a BLM organizer, said. That makes sure that person has clothes. Black Lives Matter Chicago organized the rally after overnight unrest throughout the city, with police saying that more than 100 individuals were taken into custody for a variety of offenses, including looting. That is reparations, Atkins said. Anything they wanted to take, they can take it because these businesses have insurance. Atkins said essentially the same thing a few days later, when she was interviewed by Chicago NPR station WBEZ on the subject of "why she supports looting": interviewed A lot of people are really attacking our pages. Theyre like, Oh, you support the looters. And yeah, we do, 100%. Thats reparations. And like however people choose to protest, especially if it was definitely in line with what happened with the shooting, which would be powerful to see people reacting ... without organizers just being like, Were angry and this is what were gonna do. Were gonna take the power back. I feel like these stores, these Macys, these Guccis, the PNC Banks, theyre not here for us. The city puts way more money and investment into spending time and protecting their spaces and making sure that they exist. And yet our people are constantly being pushed out of the city ... Unemployment is incredibly high, like we are in an incredible situation, and the fact that anybody gives a s*** about these businesses over what is happening in this city right now and the pain that people are in and the suffering that is taking place, I dont care. I will support the looters till the end of the day. If thats what they need to do in order to eat, then thats what youve got to do to eat .... The whole idea of criminality is based on racism anyway, because criminality is punishing people for things that they have needed to do to survive or just the way that society has affected them with white supremacist B.S. So its like her deciding what is criminal and what isnt. WMAQ-TV [Chicago].  "Black Lives Matter Holds Rally Supporting Individuals Arrested in Chicago Looting Monday."
  10 August 2020. Black, Curtis. &nbps; "Latrell Allen Police Shooting Exposes Gaps in Body Camera and Foot Pursuit Policies."
  The Chicago Reporter.  14 August 2020. Yoon-Ji Kang, Esther.  "Officers Disrespected Englewood Residents Following Police Shooting, Activists Say."
  WBEZ [Chicago].  10 August 2020. Wildeboer, Rob and Chip Mitchell.  "Officers Disrespected Englewood Residents Following Police Shooting, Activists Say."
  WBEZ [Chicago].  12 August 2020. In August 2018, police in Iowa charged 24-year-old Cristhian Rivera with the murder of Mollie Tibbetts, a 20-year-old college student who had gone missing while jogging more than a month earlier.  charged The investigation into the disappearance of Tibbetts had been closely followed on a national level for weeks, but the arrest of Rivera, who authorities say is an undocumented immigrant from Mexico, prompted some commentators -- led by President Donald Trump -- to bring her death into the realm of politics.  In a short video posted to Twitter, Trump used the murder of Tibbetts to advance his immigration policies, including the long-touted construction of a wall along the U.S. border with Mexico: pic.twitter.com/wYCNmkkaNR pic.twitter.com/wYCNmkkaNR  Donald J. Trump (@realDonaldTrump) August 22, 2018 August 22, 2018  The politicization of Tibbetts' death continued in the days following the arrest of Rivera, whom authorities in Iowa say led them to her remains and has confessed to the murder. On 23 August, the right-wing junk news Facebook page "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" posted a widely-shared meme which claimed that "liberals" had started a GoFundMe campaign to collectively raise $5,000,000 for Rivera's bail. It contained what was presented as a screenshot from the GoFundMe website, along with the introductory message: "Liberals raising the bail money for a murder [sic] just #WalkAway." meme "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" added: "Is this for real? Are Democrats raising money for this [piece of shit]?"   #WalkAway is an online campaign which purports to represent individuals who have left the Democratic party, supposedly in dismay at left-wing policies and vehement criticism or disparagement of President Donald Trump. A Twitter tracking tool called Hamilton68, which is run by the Alliance for Securing Democracy, has found that Russian bot networks have boosted the spread of the #WalkAway hashtag.  campaign Russian bot networks The meme was also promoted in several widely-shared tweets, including one posted by the self-described "investigative journalist" Laura Loomer, who has a track record of fabricating and perpetuating conspiracy theories: tweets track record Soooooooo@jihadwatchRS cant have a @gofundme for his journalism, but #MollieTibbettss illegal immigrant murderer can? ? @jihadwatchRS @gofundme #MollieTibbetts We need a very powerful lawyer of group of lawyers to sue these tech companies for violation of public accommodation laws. This is absolutely absurd. pic.twitter.com/dnEOoQcGNv pic.twitter.com/dnEOoQcGNv  Laura Loomer (@LauraLoomer) August 23, 2018 August 23, 2018  The meme's central claim is false. Nobody (liberal or otherwise) has set up a GoFundMe campaign to raise Rivera's bail (which is, in fact, $5,000,000.) The meme features some sloppy image editing, for example the jarring difference in font between "$117,504" and "of 5,000,000 to make bail."  bail   It also contains mistakes. On the actual GoFundMe website, the feature which shows how much money a campaign has raised always follows the same format: "$9,999 of $99,999 goal," as shown in the example below:   In the GoFundMe mobile app, the same feature is slightly different, always following the format "$9,999 raised of $99,999 goal." Neither the website or app display this meter with a description of the campaign (such as "to make bail") affixed to the end, and they always include dollar signs before every amount (which is not the case in the fake "Cristhian Rivera" meme.) format As well being crudely doctored, the "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" meme does not follow either of these formats, which establishes that it is a fake.  No campaign relating to Cristhian Rivera's bail existed on GoFundMe as of 24 August 2018, as a quick search of the website shows. (Neither did any such campaign exist under "Christian Rivera," as the suspect's name is sometimes misspelled, or "Cristhian Bahena Rivera," his full name.) Furthermore, no such campaign had ever existed. search exist Bahena When a campaign is removed from GoFundMe, it remains discoverable on search engines. For example, in August 2018 GoFundMe deleted a potentially fraudulent campaign purporting to raise funds for medical care for a Trump supporter supposedly attacked with a brick in Arizona. Performing a Google search for the title of the campaign ("Darrell's medical bills") still yields a residual URL for that campaign: campaign     "Uncle Sam's Misguided Children" is a hyperpartisan Facebook page which frequently posts misleading or fake content and memes, some of which we have debunked previously.  debunked A separate campaign relating to Rivera (but not mentioning his bail) was launched on 22 August. It, too, used his mugshot but it was titled "Iowa billboard" and aimed to purchase a billboard which would show Rivera's photograph along with the slogan "Vote Democrat: No border. No wall. Just death for you all." campaign Foley, Ryan. "Authorities: Iowa Student Killed by Mexican in US Illegally."
 The Associated Press. 22 August 2018. Palma, Bethania. "Did the #WalkAway Campaign Use Stock Photographs for People It Claimed Left the Democratic Party?"
 Snopes.com. 25 July 2018. O., Caroline. "Pro-Trump and Russian-Linked Twitter Accounts Are Posing as Ex-Democrats In New Astroturfed Movement."
 ArcDigital. 5 July 2018. Palma, Bethania. "Conspiracy Theories Immediately Appear After Santa Fe School Shooting."
 Snopes.com. 18 May 2018. KNXV Phoenix. "Video -- Valley GoFundMe Page Taken Down."
 KNXV/MSN. 23 August 2018. Claim:  A new video game calling for players to steal underwear from models has folks up in arms.   . Example:  [Collected on the Internet, 2000] Fathers Say Stop Simon & Schuster's Panty Raider (Duluth, MN, April 26, 2000)  The national advocacy group Dads and Daughters today called on Simon and Schuster Interactive to halt its scheduled May release of the CD-ROM game called Panty Raider. To win the game, boys must strip supermodels down to their underwear, then provide photographs of them to aliens who "wore out" their one lingerie catalog - or else the aliens' "hormone driven anger" will destroy the earth. Among the gamers' tools to induce the undressing: "Lures - Items such as tiny mints (lunch!) and credit cards. No self-respecting supermodel can resist these items."  From making fun of anorexia to objectifying girls to assuming that boys just want titillation from computer games, Panty Raider is a disgrace.  Among the objections raised in a letter to the company, Dads and Daughters said: "Anorexia KILLS people, and holds painfully long years of recovery for those girls and women who do survive. It's no more suited for joking than cancer. And then there is the stereotype that the ideal girls are obsessed with shopping and appearance. We have daughters and we know better.  And, we are offended when our daughters are repeatedly subjected to the destructive stereotypes disseminated by games like Panty Raider." DADs executive director Joe Kelly added that the game is also offensive to fathers of sons. "We don't see the humor or fun in glorifying what Panty Raider calls 'hormone driven anger' in boys, especially after tragedies like the Columbine shootings. We are offended when our sons are repeatedly subjected to the destructive stereotypes of boys objectifying females, placing titillation above all else, and using violence or its threat to get their way." Dads and Daughters suggests that other parents use the company's website to insist that "Panty Raider" not be released this month. Or write Simon & Schuster Interactive, 1230 Avenue of the Americas, New York, NY 10020 or call 212/632-3544. website Dads and Daughters is the national nonprofit membership group for fathers with daughters. DADs helps fathers strengthen their relationships with daughters and transform the pervasive messages that value girls more for how they look than who they are. DADs acts against marketers who undermine daughters to sell their products. S&S Interactive, a division of Viacom, produces dozens of CD-ROM games in the entertainment and education categories. For the full correspondence between Dads and Daughters and Simon and Schuster Interactive, visit Dads and Daughters. Dads and Daughters Origins:  Panty Raider, a video game in which sex-obsessed aliens seek photos of lingerie-clad models, has become a target of outrage and ridicule even before its projected May 2000 release. The call to arms quoted above is but one of many circulating on the Internet. Women's groups, family advocates and serious gamers are outraged over the game and would stop its release if they could.   Panty Raider: From Here To Immaturity has provoked some calls to boycott publisher Simon & Schuster.  Those objecting to the game claim it portrays women as brainless appearance-concerned sex objects and men as angry and violent and postulate it's aimed at the pre-teen and early teen market. The firm's spokesman, Peter Binazeski, says it's meant for a different audience. "Panty Raider has an 'M' rating, limiting it to those 17 and older." As for criticisms of its premise: "It's humor," he says. "Some people will love it, some people will not love it."  Which is a point. The 1987 gaming classic Leisure Suit Larry was also an exercise in inappropriate humor, requiring players to lead the title character through one embarrassing sexual escapade to another to complete the game. Subsequent offerings in this watershed series featured wilder scenarios than the first, with the humor sinking to achieve new lows with each new release. Large-breasted, scantily-clad "babes" abound in every incarnation of Larry, yet there was never an outcry over it. Gamers understood Larry's target audience to be adult adventure players with a taste for bathroom humor and thus didn't overly concern themselves with the possibility it might influence the mindset of youngsters whose hands Larry had fallen  into. Further, the premise of any number of video games relies on themes one would fervently pray are never ported back to the real world. Violence and sexism run rampant through the realm of video gaming. Big weapons blasting big holes in the irredeemably evil are often the norm, a behavior that imparts a message that provided one is up against bad guys or has right on one's side, it's okay to resort to wild sprees of violence and even to murder whoever stands in the way. When female characters appear, they're often male fantasy stereotypes: powerful sword-wielding warrior woman, helpless princess, icily-beautiful enemy queen, or secretive vamp one has to wheedle a key piece of information out of. In each case, the gals are dressed to excite the fellas, often in impossible costumes made up of little more than leather straps. In this world, women are eye candy first and foremost; whatever other functions they serve to advance the plot of the game are left to run a distant second to their duties as walking centerfolds. To win Panty Raider, players must strip a supermodel to her underwear, then provide photographs to a trio of aliens who are looking to replace a worn out lingerie catalog. Failure will incur the space creatures' wrath, causing them to make good on their threat to blow up the Earth. Judged within the context of what has gone before, Panty Raider isn't any more sexist or objectionable than any number of its predecessors. Times may have changed though, with what was okay a few years ago now seen as posing an unmitigated danger to society. Concern that adolescents might be unduly influenced by Panty Raider are easily answered by not buying them the game and by making the effort to supervise their play of video games in general. It's unrealistic to call for a world in which every single item is made kid-friendly, lest that item drop into an impressionable youngster's hands. Supervision of children remains the province of their parents; it's not up to every video game company to produce only items that impart the right values, it's up to the parents to screen what reaches their children, rejecting as unsuitable whatever they believe would foster in their offspring the wrong set of values.   Are the concerns of Dads and Daughters and other such groups valid? Probably. But is the answer sticking a cork into one piece of software, or is it striving to be a responsible parent by filtering out what are seen as harmful influences? The bottom line is that there just aren't that many corks, and one victory in this area might lull some into believing they no longer have to be vigilant because others are doing it for them. Better to concentrate on the one bottleneck  what's allowed to reach one's kids  a parent can and should be the watchdog over. Barbara "panty hosed" Mikkelson Additional Information:      Panty Raider announcement   (Simon and Schuster Interactive)  Last updated:  2 December 2007    Sources:   Clifford, Jane.  "New Game Is Modeling Bad Behavior."   The San Diego Union-Tribune.  6 May 2000  (p. E1).     Thomas, Karen.  "Naughty Game Has Knickers in a Twist."   USA Today.  3 May 2000  (p. D1).     The Ottawa Citizen.  "Horny Alien Video Game Incurs Wrath, Ridicule."   6 May 2000  (p. B5).     The [Singapore] Straits Times.  "Parents Want Panty Raider Game Stopped."   6 May 2000  (p. 4).