id
stringlengths 4
7
| query
stringlengths 166
33.3k
| answer
stringclasses 3
values | choices
sequencelengths 3
3
| gold
int64 0
2
|
|---|---|---|---|---|
FMD2800 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: We re not sure why Fox News host Sean Hannity posed for this picture (see below) since he s obviously not happy with it but now, Donald Trump s cult member is upset with the New York Times for selecting the photo for the cover of its magazine. Along with the photo, the cover reads, How Far Will Sean Hannity Go? So @nytimes takes 100 s and 100 s of pics. Obviously they picked the best one? the Fox News host tweeted to his more than 3.1 million followers.So @nytimes takes 100 s and 100 s of pics. Obviously they picked the best one? https://t.co/6c0yV1lupe Sean Hannity (@seanhannity) November 28, 2017Here s the photo that s freaking Hannity out.Internet users thought Hannity s reaction to the photo was pretty funny.Snowflake much Sean? Paul Dickinson (@prdickinson) November 28, 2017We re wondering the same thing.Why would this dummy pose for a photo like that if he didn't want them to use it? CaptainPajamas (@captainpajamas) November 28, 2017Makes you look young. And deranged. So half-accurate. Doug Brooks (@Hoosier84) November 28, 2017Hahahajahahaaa Cathy R (@CathyMaiRu) November 28, 2017I liked this one.. pic.twitter.com/wL9en474YQ Hanna (@hanna_shane) November 28, 2017Could be worse. They could have taken a pic when you first got out of bed. pic.twitter.com/6hKUGGIYRm greg fuller (@GregFuller4Real) November 28, 2017I think they did. Loud Asshat Drain The Trumps (@DrainTheTrumps) November 28, 2017When Donald Trump was the president-elect, he wanted the media to stop publishing unflattering photos of him so naturally, Internet users circulated them quickly. Trump hates photos displaying his many chins. Trump was speaking off-the-record at the time to whine about the unflattering shots. He also complained about photos of himself that NBC used that he found unflattering.At one point, Trump turned to NBC News President Deborah Turness and told her the network won t run a nice picture of him, instead choosing this picture of me, as he made a face with a double chin.I hear Donald Trump really hates this photo. So make sure not to retweet it. Ever. pic.twitter.com/6dUnchk8tC Charles Johnson (@Green_Footballs) November 25, 2016#TrumpleChin is bad. Very weak. I have a tremendous chin. Other chins shouldn't be allowed on Twitter. Sad. pic.twitter.com/mb18VywW3L Persistent Woman (@PixMichelle) November 25, 2016Apparently Donald Trump is very upset @NBC used an unflattering photo of him.Anyway, here's him and a pelican.Please don't RT. pic.twitter.com/6IAaSYKpzc Steve Marmel (@Marmel) November 27, 2016We can understand Hannity s obsession with Donald Trump now. They re basically the same person with the same ego. The piece published by the Times was actually a softball interview but Hannity is upset over the photograph.Hannity described himself to the Times as an advocacy journalist, or an opinion journalist I want to give my audiences the best shows possible and we describe him as a Donald Trump sycophant who has a raging hard-on for Hillary Clinton. While Hannity frequently calls liberals snowflakes, he continues to be the snowflakiest Fox News host on TV and on Twitter.Image via screen capture. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2801 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 5 Hundreds of far-right protesters marched to Milan's Montello barracks on Monday, to protest the barrack's transformation into a refugee shelter. Supporters of regionalist political party Lega Nord and radical right group Casa Pound turned out to protest. The protesters chanted anti-refugee chants while marching with flares, numerous Italian and Casa Pound flags, and banners such as "Italians first"; "Defend Milan". COURTESY: RT's RUPTLY video agency, NO RE-UPLOAD, NO REUSE - FOR LICENSING, PLEASE, CONTACT http://ruptly.tv Leave a Reply Login with your Social ID Your email address will not be published. Name | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2802 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: U.N. political affairs chief Jeffrey Feltman, who visited North Korea this week, expressed willingness to ease tension on the Korean peninsula, state media said on Saturday, amid a rising war of words over the North s missile and nuclear programs. North Korea also said in a statement carried by its official KCNA news agency that the U.N. envoy acknowledged the negative impact of sanctions on humanitarian aid to North Korea. Feltman, the highest-level U.N. official to visit North Korea since 2012, was not immediately available for comment. The United Nations expressed concerns over the heightened situation on the Korean peninsula and expressed willingness to work on easing tensions on the Korean peninsula in accordance with the U.N. Charter which is based on international peace and security, KCNA said. North Korea is pursuing nuclear and missile weapons programmes in defiance of U.N. sanctions and international condemnation. On Nov. 29, it test-fired an intercontinental ballistic missile which it said was its most advanced yet, capable of reaching the mainland United States. The United States and South Korea conducted large-scale military drills this week, which the North said have made the outbreak of war an established fact . KCNA said North Korean officials and Feltman agreed that his visit helped deepen understanding and that they agreed to communicate regularly. Feltman visited Pyongyang from Tuesday to Saturday, KCNA said. Last month s missile test prompted a U.S. warning that North Korea s leadership would be utterly destroyed if war were to break out. The Pentagon has mounted repeated shows of force after North Korean tests. North Korea regularly threatens to destroy South Korea and the United States and says its weapons programmes are necessary to counter U.S. aggression. The United States stations 28,500 troops in the South, a legacy of the 1950-53 Korean War. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2803 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Turkish Objections Won't Stop YPG's Involvement by Jason Ditz, October 26, 2016 Share This
US Lt. Gen. Stephen Townsend, the leader of the US military forces in Iraq and Syria , today announced that Kurdish YPG forces will participate in the invasion of the ISIS capital city of Raqqa, despite Turkish government demands that the Kurds not be allowed to take part.
Townsend was a bit vague on the details of Kurdish involvement, saying the US are “going to take this in steps,” and that Turkey has to realize the only way that the US is going to have enough force to take over Raqqa any time soon is with a significant portion of the YPG involved.
Turkish Foreign Minister Mevlut Cavusoglu reiterated that his government wants only “local forces” involved in the Raqqa battle, and that the YPG, who Turkey considers a terrorist organization, must not be allowed to take part in any way.
Turkey’s military has been attacking the YPG in several locations around Syria over the past week, including heavy airstrikes which killed an estimated 200 YPG fighters who were engaged in an offensive against ISIS around Afrin. The Turkish government has repeatedly complained the YPG is gaining too much territory in Syria, and that they must abandon much of it. Last 5 posts by Jason Ditz | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2804 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The semi-autonomous Kurdistan Regional Government (KRG) in northern Iraq welcomed on Thursday a call by Iraqi Prime Minister Haider al-Abadi for talks to resolve a crisis triggered by a Kurdish referendum on independence last month. Abadi spoke on Tuesday, saying he considered the Sept. 25 referendum, in which Kurds voted overwhelmingly for independence despite Baghdad s opposition, a thing of the past . The day before, the Iraqi army retook the oil-producing Kirkuk area from Kurdish Peshmerga forces on his orders. It will not be possible to resolve the issues through military operations, the KRG cabinet said in a statement after a meeting in the Kurdistan region capital Erbil. (We have) asked the international community to help both sides start a dialogue to solve the outstanding issues based on the Iraqi constitution, the statement said. Abadi had asked that the KRG cancel the outcome of the referendum as a precondition for negotiations to begin. The statement made no mention of the referendum, for which Baghdad retaliated with a series of punitive measures including the recapture of Kirkuk, which lies just outside KRG boundaries but had been in Peshmerga hands since 2014. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2805 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Donald Trump is fuming over the size of his little inauguration last weekend. Not only did his inauguration have embarrassingly low attendance numbers when compared to Barack Obama s previous inaugurations, but it was also completely outnumbered by the Women s March, which was a protest AGAINST him!Trump has tried to make his inauguration look less pathetic by having his team spew lies, despite the fact that photographic evidence clearly shows that almost no one went to see him get sworn in as the 45th President of the United States. While Trump continues to soothe his monstrous ego on Twitter, his political opponents are having the time of their lives mocking him and what Democratic Senator Jeff Merkley just did was the perfect way to troll someone like Trump.At the confirmation hearing for Rep. Mike Mulvaney (R-SC), Trump s pick for director of the Office of Management and Budget, Merkley forced Mulvaney to humiliate Trump in front of everyone by showing side by side photos of Trump s inauguration and Obama s 2009 inauguration. To make things even worse, Merkley asked Mulvaney to publicly state which inauguration crowd was bigger.Faced with the evidence and a room full of peers, Mulvaney was forced to admit what Trump and his team wouldn t: that Obama s inauguration crowd was bigger. Merkley then tied it all together, making sure to state his point in mocking Trump. He said: The reason I m raising this is because budgets often contain varied deceptions. You and I talked in my office about the magic asterisk. This is an example of something where the president s team, on something very simple and straightforward, wants to embrace a fantasy rather than a reality. You can watch this beautiful moment below:Later, Merkley made sure Mulvaney got the point by calling on him to give actual budgets instead of the alternative facts Trump s team has become well known for.This was absolutely brilliant, and we need more senators calling Trump and his team out for their lies. They need to be held accountable, and this was a great way to do it.Featured image via Chip Somodevilla / Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2806 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Do Republican Presidents Lead to Poorer Performance for the Dow Jones? Claim summaries: A Facebook meme purporting to prove that the Dow suffers under Republican presidencies ignores key data.
contextual information: After the Dow Jones Industrial Average lost a historic 1,175 points in a single day in February 2018, the left-wing Facebook page Occupy Democrats was keen to point out a trend. In a 6 February meme, the page listed what it called the "Biggest One-Day Drops in Dow Jones History," along with the name of the U.S. president in office at the time of each point drop. According to the meme, each of the largest drops occurred during the presidencies of Donald Trump and George W. Bush—both Republicans. The meme concluded: "Share this for your friends who STILL think Republicans are GOOD for the economy!" The meme correctly lists the seven biggest one-day point drops in Dow Jones history, which all took place during the tenure of two Republican presidents, though it leaves out the eighth, ninth, and tenth, which occurred with Democrats Bill Clinton and Barack Obama in the White House. The main problem with the meme, however, is that its conclusion (that the numbers show which president is good for the economy) overstates the influence of a president— as opposed to macroeconomic and geopolitical forces—on stock market trends. In fact, one-day losses and gains can sometimes happen despite the policies and efforts of the person in the Oval Office. For example, many commentators attributed the 29 September 2008 points drop—the second-biggest ever—to the U.S. House of Representatives' failure to pass a $700 billion bank bailout bill, which President George W. Bush had pushed for. Even if one simply wanted to examine during which presidencies the Dow suffered the largest single-day losses, looking at the largest point drops wouldn't be the way to do it. As the stock market has grown in value over the last century, large point drops have become more common, even if their impact on the overall market value isn't particularly great. To get a clearer picture of the impact of these drops, one would have to measure the drop in percentage terms rather than points. Five of these ten events took place during the era of the Great Depression, and all but one occurred during the tenure of Republican presidents. However, if one were to insist on linking the occupant of the White House to the performance of the stock market, a better way to do it would be to track the average performance of the Dow Jones over the entire course of a presidency, rather than looking at one-day outliers in isolation. To illustrate this, we looked at the average performance of the Dow over the course of the last nine presidential terms. We used Yahoo! Finance data for this, which only goes back as far as 29 January 1985, so we're missing figures for the first week or so of Ronald Reagan's second administration. So while Donald Trump's presidency did see the largest one-day points drop in Dow Jones history, it has also seen the biggest average one-day percentage growth since 1985. However, this is based on only 12 months of data, and the next three years could see that 0.09 percent growth rate drop. The biggest average daily percentage growth over the course of a four-year presidency was 0.08 percent, during Bill Clinton's first administration between 1993 and 1997. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2807 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The last three recipients of the highly coveted Arthur Ashe award for courage were gay: GMA host, Robin Roberts (2013), First openly gay NFL player,Michael Sam (2014), and now America s transgender darling, Bruce (Caitlyn) Jenner. Why are we celebrating the demasculinization of America s men? Has ESPN s sports coverage taken backseat to their obvious progressive agenda?At the 1976 summer Olympics in Montr al, Bruce Jenner won the gold medal for the men s decathlon, setting a world record with 8616 points.In July, Jenner will be honored with another award, this time for a much different achievement. On Monday, Time reported that at ESPN s ESPY Awards, the former world s greatest male athlete will receive the acclaimed Arthur Ashe Award for coming out as a transgender.In an interview with Diane Sawyer back in April, Jenner stated that he was a woman trapped in a man s body and had struggled with this conundrum since childhood.Jenner explained in an interview with Vanity Fair that his cover photo shoot with legendary photo-journalist Annie Leibovitz was a good day. This shoot was about my life and who I am as a person. It s not about the fanfare, it s not about people cheering in the stadium, it s not about going down the street and everybody giving you that a boy, Bruce, pat on the back, O.K. This is about your life. Jenner told VF, If I was lying on my deathbed and I had kept this secret and never ever did anything about it, I would be lying there saying, You just blew your entire life. You never dealt with yourself, and I don t want that to happen. The transition hasn t been entirely smooth for Jenner. He admits that he had some second thoughts about becoming a woman. In a passage from the VF interview, Jenner tells reporter Buzz Bissinger that he suffered a panic attack the day after undergoing 10-hour facial feminization surgery in March.Jenner remembers thinking, What did I just do? What did I just do to myself? Bissinger reveals in the interview that Jenner has not removed his penis.The Ashe Award, which Jenner will be receiving alongside his family at the ESPY award show in July, is one of the most prestigious in sports. According to ESPN, the recipients reflect the spirit of Arthur Ashe, possessing strength in the face of adversity, courage in the face of peril and the willingness to stand up for their beliefs no matter what the cost. Via: Breitbart News | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2808 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: For decades, Patricia Lewis toiled as a security guard for NYC Health Hospitals, a duty she performed along with a second, and sometimes a third, job. “I showered in the hospitals, I slept on gurneys and hardly came home,†Ms. Lewis, 68, recalled. All that work was to ensure her children’s potential would be realized. Ms. Lewis raised them by herself after a divorce in 1984, motivated by her vow to keep them safe and pay for their college educations. “These children, I cannot lose them to drugs, I cannot lose them to crime,†she said. “And today, my children, all three of them, are successful. But their success, the way the world is, they cannot help me. †Ms. Lewis left her security guard job in 2009, a year and a half after tests showed she had cancer in her left breast. The disease has returned four times since, most recently in August, despite repeated treatments of chemotherapy, radiation and surgery to remove cancerous tissue. “It takes a whole lot of effort to psych yourself that you’re not going to die,†she said. Ms. Lewis must scrape together every dollar to cover medications, hospital bills and other expenses, including rent and groceries. She receives a combined $2, 089 a month from her Social Security and pension payments. “I can’t look to my kids to contribute and help me because they will go under,†she said. They have homes, responsibilities and children of their own, she said. Ms. Lewis’s two sons are police officers, one in Texas and the other in upstate New York. Her daughter is a teacher in New Jersey. Ms. Lewis tries to see them and her nine grandchildren whenever she can. “I’m fighting the cancer because it’s fighting me,†she said. “I know I want to live. I worked so hard. I want to enjoy my grandkids. †In 2011, Ms. Lewis contacted Community Health Advocates, a program run by the Community Service Society of New York, one of the organizations supported by The New York Times Neediest Cases Fund. It helped Ms. Lewis buy medication at a lower price. This year, she sought its help again. The Community Service Society used $1, 380 in Neediest funds to pay an outstanding medical bill and back rent, and to buy a special mattress that allows Ms. Lewis to elevate her legs and sleep more comfortably. The yearslong fight against cancer has taken a toll on her body, if not her spirit. Her grip is so feeble she requires a neighbor’s help to open a can of tomato sauce. Part of a tooth broke off simply chewing a carrot. Even if the cancer goes away, she will need to wear a wig for the rest of her life because her hair has grown back in unsightly patches. “You never know how cold you are at night until you have no hair,†Ms. Lewis said. When it came time to select a wig, she balked at fancier ones because she worried they would make her look like Tina Turner or the Lion King. “I just want something where when my grandkids look at me, I’m still grandma,†she said. A desire for normalcy sealed her decision not to remove her left breast, especially after doctors told her the cancer could return anyway. She does not care what her reconstructed breast looks like now. “It looks distorted,†she said. “But it’s mine. †She added: “I’m not looking for a husband, but I like to go swimming with my kids and grandkids. I want to be normal, as normal as I can be. †She has covered the walls of her Harlem apartment, which she calls a cage, with photographs of her grandchildren, as well as artwork they have made for her, turning the sterile, austere space into a shrine to her family. Doctors have told Ms. Lewis that after her current radiation treatment, which will run through December, her condition could stabilize for five years. She absorbed the news with skeptical optimism, aware that her health has fluctuated and that she is unlikely to keep living on her own. “Eventually I’ll be in an assisted living home,†Ms. Lewis said. She has already started looking at options. “I’ve made peace with myself with the way I’m going. †For now, Ms. Lewis, often tired and sick from treatments, leaves her apartment as often as she can. She visits her mother once or twice a week, attends services at the Ephesus Adventist Church in Harlem and is a regular at her neighborhood’s senior center. “I have my bad days,†Ms. Lewis said. “But I have my good days, too. I look at my bad days, the good days overrule. If I stay in this bed, I will surely die. If I get out of this bed, I can make myself do. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2809 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Jerusalem (CNN) When Israel destroyed Iraq's nuclear reactor in 1981, then-Israeli Prime Minister Menachem Begin drew an important line in the sand: No enemy could be permitted to develop weapons of mass destruction.
Israel, he declared, would defend itself "with all the means at our disposal."
These words still reverberate in Israel today, and they help explain why Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu is flying to Washington next week to give a controversial speech before Congress on Iran.
Netanyahu wants to thwart a nuclear deal world powers are hammering out with Tehran, a deal that his government believes will leave Iran with the means to potentially develop a nuclear weapon -- and leave him with the same choice Begin faced more than three decades ago.
"This is the primary Israeli fear," said Ronen Bergman, military and intelligence analyst for the daily newspaper Yedioth Ahronoth. "They are afraid at the end of the day, if negotiations fail, Israel would be left alone to make the call -- whether to contain an Iranian nuclear capability or to make the call on the strike."
In making the trip to Capitol Hill, Netanyahu is willing to risk the ire of the White House, which is chagrined that he is expected to rail against the administration's deal-making and encourage Congress to push for an Iran sanctions package that President Barack Obama has threatened to veto.
And Netanyahu is doing so even amidst recriminations -- over how Republican House Speaker John Boehner and the Israeli Embassy handled the invitation -- that have tainted the atmosphere between the prime minister and the White House. Administration officials charge that the invitation violated protocol and has partisan overtones.
While the Israeli leader's speech might only intensify those bad feelings, Netanyahu has said it's worth the cost of stating his case before the American public. Advisers indicate that with a deal looming, he feels that he has less and less time to prevent what he sees as a catastrophic outcome.
Netanyahu critics and many analysts see a political motive.
His speech to Congress comes two weeks before the Israeli election, in which he is facing a tight race. His security credentials and rhetorical skills are two of his strongest assets, and being welcomed by U.S. senators and representatives could play well on television screens in Tel Aviv. The White House has used the proximity of the elections as its reason for denying Netanyahu an Oval Office meeting during the trip.
But many confidants insist that Netanyahu has a strong ideological conviction on the need to block Iran and treats his roles as protector of Israel and the Jewish people with the utmost seriousness. For him, this is a chance to act before Israel is faced with choosing between an Iranian bomb and bombing Iran.
Inherent in that choice is the fear Israel cannot count on the United States to stop Tehran.
Obama has famously said that he's "got Israel's back" when it comes to Iran. Yet Israeli officials say they have watched over the past several years as the Obama administration has backtracked from its firm stance on Iran's nuclear program to a position that could potentially allow Iran to maintain a significant uranium enrichment program.
"What started with zero (centrifuges), then went to a symbolic enrichment capacity of a few hundred. Now it is well known we are speaking about several thousands," Israeli Minister of Intelligence Yuval Steinitz said in an interview with CNN. "We think that the overall goal of the negotiation should be to get rid of the Iranian nuclear threat and not just hold it or restrain it or freeze it."
Israel maintains that even an Iranian threshold nuclear state, leaving Iran with enough enriched uranium to give it "break-out capacity" to build a nuclear weapon, would position Tehran as a superpower in the region and enable it to threaten Israel with impunity.
That would challenge the so-called qualitative military edge that Israel has built up over decades to fend off its enemies. Israeli military leaders worry they may have to think twice about responding to say, a Hezbollah attack on Israeli troops, out of fear of Iranian reprisal.
"This is a severe strategic threat to the variety of options that the national security of Israel stands upon," Bergman said. "They want to have the bomb in order not to use it. They want to position themselves as a regional superpower and this would give them a nuclear umbrella over their heads."
It's a daily threat to their existence that many Israelis believe the United States -- half a world away -- can't possibly understand. And some Israelis aren't as sanguine as Bergman that Iran wouldn't want to use the bomb.
"I have no doubt about the seriousness and the good intentions of the Obama administration," said Steinitz, the intelligence minister. "Maybe we are more concerned because we feel the threat because they are speaking about the elimination of the Jewish state."
Moreover, Israel fears a nuclear Iran would spark an arms race in the Middle East, potentially surrounding them with a group of nuclear-armed enemies in a region in turmoil.
While the United States has long pledged to safeguard Israel's security, Israeli leaders now fear the easing in relations between the United States and Iran following the election of President Hasan Rouhani has clouded the Obama administration's judgment. And the U.S.-Iran thaw has come at the same time that tensions between Obama and Netanyahu have escalated.
"The sense in Israel, and it goes way beyond Netanyahu, is that the president underestimates Iran's duplicity, underestimates Iran's ruthlessness, the religious imperative behind its ideology," said David Horovitz, editor of the Times of Israel news website.
In addressing Congress next week, aides say that Prime Minister Netanyahu feels compelled to warn the U.S. and the world that, in his view, beneath its friendly new image, Iran is still intent on wiping Israel off the map.
"I think that he feels fated that he is leading the Jewish people when it potentially faces a genocidal threat," Horovitz said. "That is the Netanyahu mindset -- that people are in peril, and he needs to stand firm and say what he wants to say and if necessary take the step that needs to be taken." | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2810 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Pascua-Lama Claim summaries: Petition addresses environmental issues associated with the Pascua-Lama mining operation in Chile.
contextual information: Claim: The petition addresses environmental issues associated with the Pascua-Lama mining operation in Chile. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006] Dear friends who care about our earth, judge for yourself if you want to take action. In the Valle de San Félix, the purest water in Chile flows from two rivers, fed by two glaciers. Water is a precious resource, and wars will be fought for it. Indigenous farmers use this water; there is no unemployment, and they provide the second largest source of income for the area. Beneath the glaciers, a huge deposit of gold, silver, and other minerals has been found. To access these resources, it would be necessary to break and destroy the glaciers—something never conceived of in the history of the world—and to create two massive holes, each as large as an entire mountain: one for extraction and one for the mine's waste. The project is called Pascua-Lama, and the company behind it is Barrick Gold. This operation is planned by a multinational company, one of whose members is George Bush Senior (what a surprise, eh?). The Chilean government has approved the project to start this year, 2006. The only reason it hasn't begun yet is that the farmers have obtained a temporary stay of execution. If they destroy the glaciers, they will not only eliminate the source of especially pure water but will also permanently contaminate the two rivers, rendering them unfit for human or animal consumption due to the use of cyanide and sulfuric acid in the extraction process. Every last gram of gold will go abroad to the multinational company, leaving the people whose land it is with only poisoned water and resulting illnesses. The farmers have been fighting for their land for a long time but have been forbidden to make a TV appeal due to a ban from the Ministry of the Interior. Their only hope now of putting brakes on this project is to seek help from international justice. The world must know what is happening in Chile. The only place to start changing the world is from here. We ask you to circulate this message among your friends in the following way: please copy this text, paste it into a new email, add your signature, and send it to everyone in your address book. We ask the 100th person to receive and sign the petition to send it to [email protected] to be forwarded to the Chilean government. No to Pascua Lama! Open-cast mine in the Andean Cordillera on the Chilean-Argentine frontier. We ask the Chilean government not to authorize the Pascua Lama project to protect the three glaciers, the purity of the water in the San Félix Valley and El Tránsito, the quality of the agricultural land in the Atacama region, and the quality of life for the Diaguita people and the entire population of the region. Origins: The Pascua-Lama project is an effort undertaken by the Barrick Gold Corporation to mine rich gold and silver fields in the mountainous region along the border between Chile and Argentina. Environmental concerns associated with the project, particularly the potential destruction or relocation of glaciers that sit atop a portion of the gold fields, have led to numerous protests and petitions urging the Chilean government to intervene and stop or modify the Pascua-Lama mining plan. The above-quoted petition is "True" in the broad sense that it addresses a real issue, but, not surprisingly, the two sides (environmentalists and Barrick) make substantially different claims about the environmental and social effects of the Pascua-Lama project. Pascua-Lama Barrick Gold Corporation The controversial plan was described by The Santiago Times in March 2005: Canadian international mining company Barrick Gold has plans to relocate three glaciers in the mountain range between Argentina and Chile to gain access to 17.6 million ounces of rich gold and silver deposits. Chilean farmers and residents of the surrounding Huasco Valley are strongly opposed to the proposal to transfer the ice masses. The glaciers' tributaries are used for irrigation by the farmers, and their removal would threaten the ecological balance and agricultural production of the fertile river valley. Barrick hopes to transfer 300,000 cubic meters of ice with a 20-hectare surface area from the glaciers that surround the deposits. To mitigate ecological impact and prevent ice from melting, Barrick hopes to transfer the three glaciers, Toro I, Toro II, and Esperanza, to an area with similar surface characteristics and elevation by merging the three into a larger glacier, Guanaco, located several kilometers south with a surface area of over 200 hectares. The proposal is part of the "Pascua Lama" mining treaty, signed by Chile and Argentina in August 2004 after four years of discussion. Citizens of the Huasco Valley and Region III are taking a stand against the multibillion-dollar foreign company. Last week, an environmental group, Valley Defense, organized a demonstration against the project, where close to 200 farmers, community leaders, and neighbors marched in protest. "We don't want to live in an area contaminated by the fault of foreign economic interests," they said. Ral Montenegro, an Argentine biologist and Alternative Nobel Prize (formally Right Livelihood Award) winner, agrees with the farmers. "The issue is serious in that the project would put pressure on two important river basins that serve as the principal water supply for communities within a semi-arid environment," Montenegro said. In a letter earlier this year to President Ricardo Lagos, agricultural and community associations of the Huasco Valley voiced their concerns about the mining initiative, insisting that it threatens the ecosystem, agriculture, and water quality of the valley, which not only sacrifices agricultural exports and trade agreements but also human health. "If almost 24 hectares of glacier have been exploited solely for the project's experiments, imagine how much could be destroyed in the end," said Francisco Bou, leader for the Huasco Valley agriculturists. Other environmental concerns involve potential contamination from the chemicals to be used in the mining operation: "Pascua Lama will use sodium cyanide, arsenic, and produce toxic byproducts. The rivers El Estrecho, San Félix, and El Tránsito, together with the Santa Juana dam, are liable to be polluted by Pascua Lama. These dangerous poisons will be handled at the sources of the rivers and could damage water supplies to farms," said César Padilla of the Latin American Observatory for Environmental Conflicts. A December 2005 statement from Barrick downplayed the expressed concerns: Vincent Borg, vice president of corporate communications at Barrick in Canada, said 'glacier experts' had defined the icefields in question as 'ice reservoirs or icefields.' "Regardless of what the experts call them, Barrick is committed to their preservation and conservation. We will move only 5 acres of ice, and it is a straightforward procedure that has been proven in the past to conserve the ice. The ice in question only affects about 3-4% of the ice in the Valley, so it is not an amount that some sensationalists would like to make it appear," he said. On the issue of the use of toxic chemicals such as cyanide, he said, "Cyanide is used worldwide and can be safely used in many industrial applications. Mining comprises only 13% of cyanide use." Opponents contend that Barrick's planned procedures to move ice from the glaciers are not nearly as straightforward and safe as the company asserts: the lack of relevant technical expertise in removing glaciers implies an irreversible environmental impact. What is certain is that the three affected glaciers would suffer an environmental impact. Nevertheless, there is no certainty whatsoever of what the impact would be on glaciers or permafrost (frozen rock or soil) from the road network and the associated stabilization measures that generally involve the use of salts. With respect to the measures and actions that will be implemented for handling glaciers, there are the following concerns: The "clearing" of ice or "pieces of glacier" will be done by bulldozer and front-end loader until the entire rock bed is uncovered. In this case, any mechanical action on the glacier will cause heat transfer, which will raise the temperature of the ice, and this would be exacerbated by the high local insolation. Despite the fact that diurnal temperatures are low, the radiative balance includes more than caloric energy. There are no measurements of radiative energy, but the albedo differences between ice and rock mean that the absorption of energy is greater in rock, which would expose the glacier even more. This is also the case for controlled blasting and pushing the glaciers by the aforementioned means until their final disposition. In the case of blasting, this could elevate the temperature to thresholds of melting and evaporation, which would further encourage the destruction of the glacier. Barrick has published a Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet that counters many of the statements made in the circulated e-mail message: Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet Misleading Assertions and Facts The chain letter makes some very misleading characterizations and inaccurate statements. Here are a few examples: Statement: "Water in Chile runs from two rivers, fed by two glaciers." Fact: The Huasco Valley has more than 50 different glaciers and ice fields. The three smaller glaciers or ice fields that are adjacent to the orebody comprise only 0.3% of the potential water resources in the Valley if they were to be destroyed, which was never to be the case. Statement: "There is no unemployment ..." Fact: Contrary to this statement, unemployment levels in Region III are among the highest in Chile; the most recent statistics according to the Chilean Statistics Agency reveal rates in the valley in question to be approximately 18%. The mayors representing the four municipalities and most of the community leaders in the Huasco Valley have vocally expressed their support for Pascua-Lama, indicating that they believe Barrick will conduct an environmentally responsible project and that the generation of economic benefits is needed for the long-term sustainable development of the region. As an illustration of the lack of employment opportunities, Barrick has received over 50,000 applications for jobs. Chileans in Region III and Argentinians from San Juan are looking for meaningful employment opportunities and the ability to support their families. Human beings deserve the opportunity to make a decent livelihood. Statement: "Under the glaciers has been found a huge deposit of gold ... it would be necessary to break, to destroy the glaciers." Fact: Contrary to the fundamental premise of the email chain letter, the orebody is NOT under glaciers. This is simply not the case: 95% of the orebody is NOT under glaciers or ice fields. Protection of the remaining 5% is a key condition of the Chilean authorities' approval of the project. Statement: "The operation is planned by a multinational company, one of whose members is George Bush, Sr." Fact: Mr. Bush served in an honorary capacity as an advisor to Barrick's International Advisory Board for two years in the mid-1990s. Mr. Bush was neither a director nor an officer of the company. Statement: "If they destroy the glaciers, they will not just destroy the source of especially pure water, but they will permanently contaminate the two rivers." Fact: To underline its confidence in its operations and commitment to responsible mining practices, Barrick has committed that should the water quality change, it would immediately stop the project. In addition to the multiple barriers of protection built into the design, the company has a comprehensive water quality monitoring and management program, which will include 30 automated points from which data will be readily available in real-time for authorities and the public. This program will be subject to regular independent verification. The expanded number of monitoring points is a direct result of community consultation and dialogue with stakeholders. Statement: "Every last gram of gold will go abroad ... and not one will be left with the people." Fact: There will be substantial economic benefits that include 5,500 direct jobs during construction, 1,660 jobs during the two decades of operation, and the indirect job creation and tax revenues generated that will flow back to the communities. In addition, there will be substantial investment in infrastructure, the development of hundreds of local suppliers of goods and services, and the implementation of sustainable development programs. Statement: "The farmers ... have been forbidden to make a TV appeal by a ban from the Ministry of the Interior." Fact: The Water Users Cooperative, representing 2,000 farmers of the Huasco Valley, is fully supportive of the project. Chile is a democratic country, and the media play an important role in the public discussion of community concerns and interests. There has already been an extensive and open discussion of issues, including the participation of farmers. From a practical standpoint, the petition reproduced at the head of this page is not now valid in that the e-mail address supplied is no longer collecting or forwarding copies. The Pascua Lama project remains an issue of ongoing concern, however, and interested parties can find updated information on the subject (and a list of government and business officials to contact) at the Mining Watch Canada website. Mining Watch Canada Additional information: Pascua-Lama Fact Sheet (Barrick Gold Corporation) Campaign Against Barrick Gold's Pascua Lama Project (MiningWatch Canada) Last updated: 3 June 2006 Sources: Frank, Jade. "Farmers Protest Mining Project in Chile's Region III." The Santiago Times. 31 March 2005. Jimena, Jaquelina. "Vast Chilean Gold Mine Meets Opposition." Decanter.com. 2 December 2005. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2811 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Trump’s election breaks chains of political correctness By Ben Tanosborn Ben Tanosborn
One likely winner to come out of the 2016 US presidential election: accuracy in polling. Obviously not past but future polling!
Donald Trump, from the start of his campaign to capture the presidency, harangued his followers during the rallies with such unrestricted language that they felt liberated, able to speak out their minds without any fear of repression or recrimination. Well, at least not in the safety and camaraderie of their rallies; although also aware that politically correct America frowned on such openness, leaving them with a bi-forked tongue when applied to people who would likely judge, or categorize them . . . and that definitely applied to pollsters.
One suspects that as much as 10 percent of the actual Trump vote came out of what we could call correctness-hiding, making total mockery of most pollsters. As a pertinent note I might add that while a student in operations research, I had a professor (Anant Negandhi, UCLA) who then claimed that polling involving issues with sociopolitical subjectivity was for the most part worthless because of the difficulty in modeling a survey which would correctively identify and quantify both the causal and intervening variables. Over a generation later, that difficulty has not really changed; nor has the need of pollsters to make a living, which may push them to sell smoke and mirrors to a well-funded political establishment.
My own observation in weighing the impact of Trump’s campaign on his followers, most particularly those in the construction trades, has been one where from the start of the campaign, and solidly after Trump’s winning the Republican candidacy, these people who had expressed racial and ethnic bias with some trepidation were now doing so with little angst, as if their speech now had society’s imprimatur and they had been godfathered by Donald Trump.
After the cataclysmic misreading by a polling industry that has reverted from a science to an art . . . lagging miles behind the weather predicting science, one would expect the rigidity of science to take a critical role. So, of necessity if wishing to survive, the entire industry must undergo a true and complete overhaul. And that would be one positive result from this election: accuracy in polling.
Now that Trump has become president-elect, to be escorted to the White House by a Republican Congress . . . and a conservative-in-waiting Supreme Court, will the specter of political correctness exit from American life? Not likely; but rest assured that there will be a great degree of accommodation for the 26 percent of American bigoted patriots (bigopats). [Read my article of June 16, 2016: Bigopats: ‘ Undocumented’ Largest Group in American Politics . ]
To say that America is divided is a mini-characterization of incredible proportions that we, as a nation, will have incredible difficulty in overcoming . . . and perhaps never will. First, we must cope with the surreal realization that this United States of America isn’t at all represented by Kansas being a dream away from Oz. The results from this last election have told us the naked truth about our nation; a truth that most Americans would like to keep under wraps: that more than a divided country split in two or more political camps, America is really a fallen Humpty Dumpty fragmented economically, socially, and politically in a way that it will take a Herculean effort to be able to put it back together again. An effort that requires drastic change: both political and institutional.
Once upon a united America, we insist in telling ourselves, we were the land of promise and hope; the great experiment in humankind: economic opportunity, the American dream, the mythical melting pot, freedom, dignity and self-realization. But we seem to forget, that it was the economic wellbeing in the America of generations past that did provide the glue that kept our multi-part Humpty Dumpty (diverse America) sitting smilingly on the wall, looking condescendingly over the rest of the world.
Globalization has melted that glue; and economic change for that symbolic American middle class, whether coming from the Right (Trump) or the Left (Sanders), is unlikely to improve their lot. But at the end of the day, neither would have that middle path that Hillary Clinton would have walked.
The establishment Detestables have lost the Toilet Bowl to Trump’s Deplorables . . . we either grin and bear it; or, for the lack of a better plan, get ourselves dirty fighting Trump’s Movement . . . certifiably a bowel movement in this last Toilet Bowl. Copyright © 2016 Tanosborn
Ben Tanosborn, columnist, poet and writer, resides in Vancouver, Washington (USA), where he is principal of a business consulting firm. Contact him at . | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2812 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: When multi-millionaire San Francisco 49ers quarterback Colin Kaepernick decided to take a stand against an oppressive America, some very patriotic Americans hit back.Prior to the 49er s pre-season game against WI Green Bay Packers, multi-millionaire quarterback Colin Kaeprernick, who was raised by White parents made the decision to sit out the national anthem as a form of protest: I am not going to stand up to show pride in a flag for a country that oppresses black people and people of color, Kaepernick told NFL Media in an exclusive interview after the game. To me, this is bigger than football and it would be selfish on my part to look the other way. There are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder. Kaepernick s decision didn t sit well with many Americans, but this Gold-Star Mom Teri Maxwell Johnson, who lost her son in Afghanistan isn t just going to sit by idly without letting this whiny, oppressed anti-American know how she feels.From Gold Star Mom Teri Maxwell Johnson: My heart is exploding, my lungs are without air, my blood is boiling, my body is shaking, and tears are running down my face. Colin Kaepernick of the San Francisco 49ers is refusing to stand for the national anthem. His comment stated he would not stand and show pride in a flag that represents an oppressive nation while there are bodies in the street and people getting paid leave and getting away with murder .Mr. Kaepernick, I am sitting in my livingroom looking outside at my American Flag flying at half staff. You see, my son s body lay in a street after an IED blew up the vehicle he was fighting in. His blood stains the sands of Afghanistan. He died protecting the ideals of the flag you refuse to respect. He died so that ungrateful, privileged, arrogant men like you can be just that ungrateful, privileged, and arrogant.There are brave men and women all around that stand between evil and you. Men and women willing to die to protect you because they believe in the ideals this country was founded on. Men and women of all races and all religions. Ask them, sir, about pride in the American Flag. Ask them how their heart feels when they hear the National Anthem being sung. You are a public figure, someone young people look to as an example.Shame on you. Shame on you for your disrepect towards those who are true examples of honesty, integrity, pride, and leadership. Shame on you for disrespecting my son and his life. His sacrifice.**Sgt. Joseph Johnson my soldier, my son, my hero**Gold Star Mom Terri Maxwell-Johnson told Jake Tapper (below) how she feels about Kaepernick s disrespect for our flag after he tweeted out her letter last night:Whatever you may think about Colin Kaepernick's decision, here's how it impacted one Gold Star Mom. pic.twitter.com/3uaUxNsFoM Jake Tapper (@jaketapper) August 28, 2016Here is her interview: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2813 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Sometimes the road to diet change can be fun Ad 728×90 – HBS Account – 2149237058061490 http://blogs.naturalnews.com/sometimes-road-diet-change-can-fun/
By Hesh Goldstein
Posted Friday, October 28, 2016 at 07:36am EDT
When I was a kid, if I were told that I’d be writing a book about diet and nutrition when I was older, I would’ve thought that whoever told me that was out of their mind.
Living in Newark, New Jersey, my parents and I consumed anything and everything that had a face or a mother except for dead, rotting, pig bodies, although we did eat bacon (as if all the other decomposing flesh bodies were somehow miraculously clean). Going through high school and college it was no different. In fact, my dietary change did not come until I was in my 30’s.
Just to put things in perspective, after I graduated from Weequahic High School and before going to Seton Hall University, I had a part-time job working for a butcher. I was the delivery guy and occasionally had to go to the slaughterhouse to pick up products for the store. Needless to say, I had no consciousness nor awareness, as change never came then, despite the horrors I witnessed on an almost daily basis.
After graduating with a degree in accounting from Seton Hall, I eventually got married and moved to a town called Livingston. Livingston was basically a yuppie community where everyone was judged by the neighborhood they lived in and their income. To say it was a “plastic” community would be an understatement.
Livingston and the shallowness finally got to me. I told my wife I was fed up and wanted to move. She made it clear she had to be near her friends and New York City. I finally got my act together and split for Colorado.
I was living with a lady in Aspen at the end of 1974, when one day she said, ” let’s become vegetarians”. I have no idea what possessed me to say it, but I said, “okay”!
At that point I went to the freezer and took out about $100 worth of frozen, dead body parts and gave them to a welfare mother who lived behind us.
Well, everything was great for about a week or so, and then the chick split with another guy.
So here I was, a vegetarian for a couple weeks, not really knowing what to do, how to cook, or basically how to prepare anything. For about a month, I was getting by on carrot sticks, celery sticks, and yogurt. Fortunately, when I went vegan in 1990, it was a simple and natural progression. Anyway, as I walked around Aspen town, I noticed a little vegetarian restaurant called, “The Little Kitchen”.
Let me back up just a little bit. It was April of 1975, the snow was melting and the runoff of Ajax Mountain filled the streets full of knee-deep mud. Now, Aspen was great to ski in, but was a bummer to walk in when the snow was melting.
I was ready to call it quits and I needed a warmer place. I’ll elaborate on that in a minute.
But right now, back to “The Little Kitchen”. Knowing that I was going to leave Aspen and basically a new vegetarian, I needed help. So, I cruised into the restaurant and told them my plight and asked them if they would teach me how to cook. I told them in return I would wash dishes and empty their trash. They then asked me what I did for a living and I told them I was an accountant.
The owner said to me, “Let’s make a deal. You do our tax return and we’ll feed you as well”. So for the next couple of weeks I was doing their tax return, washing their dishes, emptying the trash, eating three squares a day and learning as much as I could.
But, like I said, the mud was getting to me. So I picked up a travel book written by a guy named Foder. The name of the book was, “Hawaii”. Looking through the book I noticed that in Lahaina, on Maui, there was a little vegetarian restaurant called,” Mr. Natural’s”. I decided right then and there that I would go to Lahaina and work at “Mr. Natural’s.” To make a long story short, that’s exactly what happened.
So, I’m working at “Mr. Natural’s” and learning everything I can about my new dietary lifestyle – it was great. Every afternoon we would close for lunch at about 1 PM and go to the Sheraton Hotel in Ka’anapali and play volleyball, while somebody stayed behind to prepare dinner.
Since I was the new guy, and didn’t really know how to cook, I never thought that I would be asked to stay behind to cook dinner. Well, one afternoon, that’s exactly what happened; it was my turn. That posed a problem for me because I was at the point where I finally knew how to boil water.
I was desperate, clueless and basically up the creek without a paddle. Fortunately, there was a friend of mine sitting in the gazebo at the restaurant and I asked him if he knew how to cook. He said the only thing he knew how to cook was enchiladas. He said that his enchiladas were bean-less and dairy-less. I told him that I had no idea what an enchilada was or what he was talking about, but I needed him to show me because it was my turn to do the evening meal.
Well, the guys came back from playing volleyball and I’m asked what was for dinner. I told them enchiladas; the owner wasn’t thrilled. I told him that mine were bean-less and dairy-less. When he tried the enchilada he said it was incredible. Being the humble guy that I was, I smiled and said, “You expected anything less”? It apparently was so good that it was the only item on the menu that we served twice a week. In fact, after about a week, we were selling five dozen every night we had them on the menu and people would walk around Lahaina broadcasting, ‘enchilada’s at “Natural’s” tonight’. I never had to cook anything else.
A year later the restaurant closed, and somehow I gravitated to a little health food store in Wailuku. I never told anyone I was an accountant and basically relegated myself to being the truck driver.
The guys who were running the health food store had friends in similar businesses and farms on many of the islands. I told them that if they could organize and form one company they could probably lock in the State. That’s when they found out I was an accountant and “Down to Earth” was born. “Down to Earth” became the largest natural food store chain in the islands, and I was their Chief Financial Officer and co-manager of their biggest store for 13 years.
In 1981, I started to do a weekly radio show to try and expose people to a vegetarian diet and get them away from killing innocent creatures. I still do that show today. I pay for my own airtime and have no sponsors to not compromise my honesty. One bit of a hassle was the fact that I was forced to get a Masters Degree in Nutrition to shut up all the MD’s that would call in asking for my credentials.
My doing this radio show enabled me, through endless research, to see the corruption that existed within the big food industries, the big pharmaceutical companies, the biotech industries and the government agencies.
This information, unconscionable as it is, enabled me to realize how broken our health system is.
I left Down to Earth in 1989, got nationally certified as a sports injury massage therapist and started traveling the world with a bunch of guys that were making a martial arts movie. After doing that for about four years I finally made it back to Honolulu and got a job as a massage therapist at the Honolulu Club, one of Hawaii’s premier fitness clubs.
It was there I met the love of my life who I have been with since 1998. She made me an offer I couldn’t refuse. She said,” If you want to be with me you’ve got to stop working on naked women”. So, I went back into accounting and was the Chief Financial Officer of a large construction company for many years.
Going back to my Newark days when I was an infant, I had no idea what a “chicken” or “egg” or “fish” or “pig” or “cow” was. My dietary blueprint was thrust upon me by my parents as theirs was thrust upon them by their parents. It was by the grace of God that I was able to put things in their proper perspective and improve my health and elevate my consciousness.
The road that I started walking down in 1975 has finally led me to the point of writing my book, A Sane Diet For An Insane World. Hopefully, the information contained therein will be enlightening, motivating, and inspiring to encourage you to make different choices.
Doing what we do out of conditioning is not always the best course to follow. I am hoping that by the grace of the many friends and personalities I have encountered along my path, you will have a better perspective of what road is the best road for you to travel on, not only for your health but your consciousness as well.
Aloha!
To learn more about Hesh, listen to and read hundreds of health related radio shows and articles, and learn about how to stay healthy and reverse degenerative diseases through the use of organic sulfur crystals and the most incredible bee pollen ever, please visit www.healthtalkhawaii.com, or email me at [email protected] or call me at (808) 258-1177. Since going on the radio in 1981 these are the only products I began to sell because they work. Oh yeah, going to www.asanediet.com will allow you to read various parts of my book – “A Sane Diet For An Insane World”, containing a wonderful comment by Mike Adams. In Hawaii, the TV stations interview local authors about the books they write and the newspapers all do book reviews. Not one would touch “A Sane Diet For An Insane World”. Why? Because it goes against their advertising dollars. You might also like… | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2814 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Was an FDNY Firefighter's Helmet Worn on 9/11 Stolen? Claim summaries: Firefighter Michael O'Connell has received two replica helmets and numerous messages of support since his 2015 plea went viral, but his original helmet has not been returned.
contextual information: On June 2, 2015, New York firefighter Michael O'Connell took to Facebook to ask social media users for help in locating a helmet that had been stolen from his house a few years earlier. O'Connell posted a photograph of his son with the helmet and explained that he had worn it throughout his FDNY career, including during 9/11 and its aftermath. He wrote, "This was my FDNY helmet I wore my entire career, including 9/11/01. It was stolen from my home a while back. I know it's a long shot, but if enough people share, maybe it turns up or is sent back so I can keep it in my family! Thanks!" The NYC Wire Fire Facebook page helped spread O'Connell's message by resharing his post with the caption, "In case anyone comes across this ... maybe the thief is stupid enough to try to sell it on eBay." Within a week, the message reportedly reached more than 8 million people and had been reshared hundreds of thousands of times. Unfortunately, despite the wide dissemination of this Facebook post, it did not result in the return of O'Connell's FDNY helmet. On June 24, 2015, a few weeks after the Facebook post went viral, AM New York reported that while O'Connell had not been reunited with his helmet, he did receive an outpouring of support from the community and two replica helmets from "good Samaritans hoping to soothe the sting" of his loss. Retired firefighter Michael O'Connell's social media campaign to retrieve his stolen FDNY helmet had garnered him the next best thing—two replicas, thanks to some good Samaritans. "There are still amazing people in this world!" O'Connell said. O'Connell, 39, recently turned to Facebook to track down the significant memento that he wore at Ground Zero following 9/11 and hoped to leave to his three children. What came back instead were two painstakingly created replica helmets from good Samaritans hoping to soothe the sting of his loss and an avalanche of human kindness and compassion. "I'm taking the good out of this story, not the bad," said O'Connell, who was forced to retire from the FDNY after being diagnosed with sarcoidosis, an inflammatory disease that attacks the lungs and lymphatic system, in 2007. "We live in an amazing world. So many people are willing to help. I hope people recognize this more than all the hate out there," he said. Although this FDNY firefighter's message was originally posted in June 2015, social media users have continued to share his plea on Facebook over the ensuing years. In April 2019, for example, a screenshot of O'Connell's message that was posted by the Ramsey, New Jersey Volunteer Fire Department racked up more than 600,000 shares. When viewers learned that this message was nearly four years old by the time they encountered it in April 2019, they were left wondering if O'Connell had ever been reunited with his firefighter helmet. Unfortunately, that was not the case. O'Connell told us in April 2019, "I appreciate everyone's support in this matter. Unfortunately, my helmet was never returned! Hoping that it will make its way back home one day as I am a retired firefighter who has fallen sick due to my work on September 11th, and this was the helmet that I wore that day and throughout my career!" | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2815 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The mutually beneficial campaign detente between Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz (Tex.) came to an end on the debate stage here Thursday.
The two Republican presidential candidates, locked in a tight race to win the Feb. 1 Iowa caucuses, argued over whether Cruz meets the constitutional requirements to serve as president and whether Trump is a trustworthy conservative or is tainted by what Cruz called “New York values.â€
Theirs was far from the only battle that broke out in the sixth GOP debate of the 2016 campaign season. Sen. Marco Rubio (Fla.) had intensely personal clashes with both Cruz and New Jersey Gov. Chris Christie. Rubio and Christie are both hoping to emerge from the crowded Republican field as the establishment’s champion against the forces of insurgency that Trump and Cruz represent.
Until recently, it was in both Trump’s and Cruz’s interest to avoid a direct confrontation. Cruz was leery of alienating Trump’s supporters — who might come to him, if the incendiary billionaire were to self-destruct. Trump, for his part, did not consider Cruz much of a threat.
On Thursday, they went so far as to question each other’s fitness to govern.
Trump contended that Cruz’s birth to a U.S. citizen in Canada might disqualify him from becoming president because the Constitution decrees that only a “natural born citizen†may hold the office.
“There’s a big question mark on your head. And you can’t do that to the party. You really can’t,†Trump told Cruz.
The senator from Texas retorted that Trump was motivated more by his political prospects than any constitutional concern.
“I recognize that Donald is dismayed that his poll numbers are falling in Iowa,†Cruz said. “But the facts and the law here are really quite clear. Under long-standing U.S. law, the child of a U.S. citizen born abroad is a natural-born citizen.â€
Then it was Cruz’s turn to go on offense.
Repeating something he first said in a radio interview, Cruz charged that Trump had “New York values†— invoking that city’s reputation, particularly in red-state America, as the bastion of the liberal elite.
“I can frame it another way,†Cruz said. “Not a lot of conservatives come out of Manhattan. I’m just saying.â€
Trump responded with indignation, saying New York City is home to “loving people, wonderful people.†He recalled the fall of the World Trade Center towers on Sept. 11, 2001, noting the “smell of death†that pervaded the city for months.
“I saw something that no place on Earth could have handled more beautifully, more humanely than New York,†Trump said. He added, “That was a very insulting statement that Ted made.â€
As Trump and Cruz argued over the latter’s constitutional qualifications to be president, the other candidates struggled to get a word in. Rubio drew applause when he interjected, “I hate to interrupt this episode of Court TV, but I think we have to get back to what this election ought to be about.â€
However, when Rubio and Cruz got their chance to go at it, theirs turned out to be an esoteric back-and-forth over the consistency of their Senate votes, particularly on immigration.
After Rubio ticked through votes that he described as flip-flops and political opportunism on Cruz’s part, the Texan said: “He had no fewer than 11 attacks there. I appreciate you dumping your oppo research folder on the debate stage.â€
At that point, former Florida governor Jeb Bush interjected: “This latest back-and-forth between two backbench senators, it explains why we have the mess in Washington, D.C.â€
Christie, who has often dismissed the Senate as nothing more than a debating society, interrupted another argument between Cruz and Rubio over taxes, saying: “You’ve already had your chance, Marco. You blew it.â€
The disputes that broke out during the debate, which was sponsored by Fox Business Network and included the GOP’s seven leading presidential hopefuls, have been simmering on the campaign trail in recent days. The event gave the candidates a chance to confront one another face to face, rather than through their stump speeches, surrogates and allied super PACs.
Among the Republicans, several battles are going on at once. Where Trump and Cruz are each looking to win the caucuses by claiming to be the one who can slay the old order, the field also includes a host of current and former governors and senators.
Nearly as important as which candidate comes in first place is the question of which will emerge from what is being called the “establishment lane.â€
Rubio repeated his charge that Christie, the governor of a heavily Democratic state, has a record too liberal for a conservative party. He noted that Christie once supported Common Core educational standards, backed some gun-control legislation and supported Obama’s nomination of Supreme Court Justice Sonia Sotomayor.
“Our next president has to be someone that undoes the damage Barack Obama has done to this country,†Rubio said. “It cannot be someone that agrees with his agenda. . . . Unfortunately, Governor Christie has endorsed many of the ideas that Barack Obama supports.â€
Turning to face Rubio, Christie accused the senator of being loose with his facts and manufacturing indignation because Christie has emerged as a political threat. He reminded Rubio that he had once called him “a conservative reformer that New Jersey needed,†but that “he’s changed his tune.â€
Christie recalled October’s debate, when Rubio responded to an attack from Bush by saying someone had convinced him that Bush had to hit his onetime protege. “It appears that the same someone who has been whispering in old Marco’s ear, too,†Christie said.
As the leading candidates feuded, Ben Carson — the mild-mannered retired neurosurgeon who briefly topped the polls — urged civility. “We have to stop this because, you know, if we manage to damage ourselves and we lose the next election and a progressive gets in there and they get two or three Supreme Court picks, this nation is over as we know it,†he said.
The call did not stop Bush from going after Trump, describing his rival as “unhinged†for his policies on immigration and Muslims and misguided in his plans for high tariffs on Chinese imports.
“This would be devastating for our economy. We need somebody with a steady hand being president of the United States,†Bush said.
Trump responded with an attack on Bush’s personality.
“We don’t need a weak person being president of the United States,†Trump said, returning to an old insult that Bush is “low-energy.†“We don’t need that. We don’t need that.â€
Trump brushed off criticism of his demeanor, saying, “I will gladly accept the mantle of anger.â€
“Our military is a disaster,†he said. “Our health care is a horror show. Obamacare, we’re going to repeal it and replace it. We have no borders. Our vets are being treated horribly. Illegal immigration is beyond belief. Our country is being run by incompetent people. And yes, I am angry.â€
The debate came just 48Â hours after President Obama delivered the final State of the Union address of his presidency, which included sharp condemnation of the angry GOP rhetoric over Muslims, immigration and other issues. At the debate, the candidates flung zinger after zinger in an attempt to outdo one another in delivering the most visceral condemnation of both Obama and Clinton, his first-term secretary of state and the leading Democratic presidential candidate.
Christie called Obama “a petulant child†and likened his State of the Union to “storytime†because it painted, in Christie’s view, too rosy a picture of the country.
“We are going to kick your rear end out of the White House come this fall,†Christie said of Obama.
The language was just as strident in discussing Clinton. Bush suggested that she “might be going back and forth between the White House and the courthouse†because she is under FBI investigation for her email practices. Then Rubio stepped up the rhetoric and charged that Clinton was “disqualified from being commander in chief.â€
When co-moderator Maria Bartiromo asked Cruz about a New York Times report Wednesday that he failed to properly disclose loans from Goldman Sachs and CitiBank during his 2012 Senate campaign, Cruz used the moment to slam “the mainstream media.â€
“Yes, I made a paperwork error disclosing it on one piece of paper instead of the other,†Cruz said. “But if that’s the best the New York Times has got, they better go back to the well.â€
Although Ohio Gov. John Kasich did not figure in the more contentious exchanges, he sought to appeal directly to frustrated middle- and working-class families.
“People are upset,†he said. “You’re 50 or 51 years old and some kid walks in and tells you you’re out of work and you don’t know where to go and where to turn. Do we have an answer for that? We do.â€
David A. Fahrenthold in Washington contributed to this report. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2816 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: On Friday, Kraft Heinz seemed determined to press ahead with a $143 billion takeover bid for Unilever, an ambitious campaign that would have put dozens of the names in consumer households around the world under one roof. But less than 48 hours later, Kraft Heinz’s board — including Warren E. Buffett and the billionaire Jorge Paulo Lemann — decided to walk away. The alternative would have been to pursue a public and possibly costly fight against Unilever, a bulwark of British and Dutch business. Instead, the two consumer goods giants said on Sunday that Kraft Heinz had withdrawn its takeover bid after an agreement on friendly terms. As a joint statement from the companies put it, “Kraft Heinz has the utmost respect for the culture, strategy and leadership of Unilever. †The announcement swiftly ended what had been poised to become the biggest instance of consolidation within the food and consumer goods industry, at a time when giants in the fields have been looking to combine to command more space on grocery shelves. A combination of Kraft Heinz, itself the product of a and Unilever would have sold everything from Heinz ketchup and Oscar Mayer hot dogs to Hellmann’s mayonnaise, Dove soap and Lipton tea. Kraft Heinz surprised the world when it disclosed on Friday, at the behest of the British merger regulator, that it had made a bid for Unilever. The disclosure came after a report in The Financial Times’s Alphaville blog said the two companies had held talks. Unilever quickly responded by saying that the $143 billion offer, a roughly 18 percent premium on the company’s closing stock price on Thursday, was too low and that it saw no reason to engage in talks. Kraft Heinz had approached Unilever only a few weeks before and had hoped to court its target in private, according to people with knowledge of the talks. Much of the food world had prepared for a potentially aggressive campaign by Kraft Heinz, whose backers at the Brazilian investment firm 3G Capital have long been known as swashbuckling deal makers eager to build up titans in the food and beverage industries. Along with Mr. Buffett, 3G had engineered a takeover of Heinz in 2013 and then Heinz’s merger with Kraft two years later, each in a deal. By late last year, analysts and investors were speculating that Kraft Heinz was on the hunt for yet another major acquisition, although talk at the time centered on companies like Mondelez International, the former candy business of Kraft. Unilever, with its mix of food and household goods, had not been on many analysts’ radar screens, although they said its international profile and its strength in emerging markets would have complemented Kraft Heinz’s heavy focus on the United States. Shares of Kraft Heinz jumped more than 10 percent on Friday while those of Unilever rose 15 percent, suggesting that investors in both were eager for a union. While many on Wall Street had assumed that Kraft Heinz and 3G were prepared to fight for Unilever, Kraft Heinz and its backers had little desire to wage such a battle. That stands in contrast with how InBev, the beer company, pursued Anheuser Busch in 2008: InBev was prepared to oust Anheuser’s board before agreeing to raise its offer and reach a friendly deal. Discussions among senior executives at Kraft Heinz and Unilever, as well as their advisers, underscored that Unilever was unwilling to proceed at any price. Moreover, the British government had expressed concern about the potential acquisition, citing the treatment of another British icon, Cadbury, after its takeover by Kraft in 2010, including accusations that Kraft reneged on promises to maintain hundreds of British jobs after the deal closed. The chairman of Parliament’s business committee, Iain Wright, said on Friday that “a lot of very good British companies will be subject to fire sales without taking into account their performance and quality. †One concern was 3G’s traditional playbook of extreme down to replacing workers’ personal printers with communal ones and selling off extravagances like corporate jets. Unilever has been known for years for its commitment to environmental sustainability, although its chief executive, Paul Polman, has recently pushed for more initiatives as well. While Kraft Heinz had been prepared to make a number of concessions — including raising its offer and keeping Unilever’s headquarters in London and Rotterdam — the appetite among Mr. Buffett, Mr. Lemann and other directors for waging a fight waned, leading to the decision on Sunday morning to withdraw. That move came well ahead of a deadline set by the British takeover panel Kraft Heinz had to make a firm offer by March 17. “Kraft Heinz’s interest was made public at an extremely early stage,†Michael Mullen, a spokesman for Kraft Heinz, said in a statement. “Our intention was to proceed on a friendly basis, but it was made clear Unilever did not wish to pursue a transaction. †Kraft Heinz has been advised by Lazard and the law firm Paul, Weiss, Rifkind, Wharton Garrison Unilever received advice from the banks Centerview Partners, Morgan Stanley, UBS and Deutsche Bank. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2817 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Russia’s Gazprom has retained its Ukrainian market despite Kiev’s demand for gas falling amid an economic downturn in the country. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2818 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did Macron Scold Biden at NATO Summit? Claim summaries: Single photographs can be misinterpreted easily.
contextual information: In June 2021, world leaders from dozens of countries met in Brussels for the 31st formal meeting of the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO). U.S. President Joe Biden held a number of bilateral meetings and news conferences during the event. While several world leaders made remarks praising the American president, British Prime Minister Boris Johnson described Biden as "a big breath of fresh air," and French President Emmanuel Macron stated it was "great to have a U.S. president who's part of the club." However, some Biden critics focused on a single image from the multi-day trip that they claimed showed Macron "scolding" the U.S. president. This is a genuine image of Biden and Macron. However, the claim that Macron was "scolding" Biden is based purely on speculation. A single photograph is rarely enough to tell the entire story of an interaction. In fact, we have covered multiple instances in which single photographs were misrepresented and shared with misleading or fabricated context. In May 2017, for example, an image of Pope Francis "frowning" with former President Donald Trump was shared alongside an image of the pope "smiling" with former President Barack Obama. These photographs were both real, but they only captured a single moment from each president's meeting with the pope and did not accurately depict his mood during these meetings. We found other images that showed the pope smiling with Trump and frowning with Obama. This tactic of cherry-picking a single image to create a misleading narrative was also at play when users shared the image that supposedly showed Macron "scolding" Biden. Although one could share this "scolding" image along with claims that Biden was "bullied" by European leaders, one could also share other photographs (such as the one at the top of this page) to claim that Biden was best buds with Macron. This image of Macron "scolding" Biden is available via Getty Images. The caption states that the two leaders were having a discussion before the start of the NATO summit: "US President Joe Biden (R) and French President Emmanuel Macron (L) have a conversation ahead of the NATO summit at the North Atlantic Treaty Organization (NATO) headquarters in Brussels, on June 14, 2021." We did not find video showing the specific moment captured in this photograph, but we did find some footage of Biden and Macron talking before the start of the NATO summit. You can catch a glimpse of Biden and Macron speaking at the 3:08-minute mark of the following video. You can't hear what they are saying to one another, but it doesn't appear that this is a heated conversation. Reporting from the NATO summit also made no mention of unusual tensions between the two world leaders. In fact, it was quite the opposite. Reuters reported that the United States is back as a cooperative leader of the free world under President Joe Biden, illustrating the relief felt by many key U.S. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2819 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: FedEx Scam Claims 'Your Package Is Held in Our Warehouse' in Fake 'Delivery Notification' Email Claim summaries: If you receive an email or text message about an unexpected package delivery, read it carefully -- it might be a scam.
contextual information: In December 2022, a FedEx email scam circulated, claiming to be a "package delivery notification" from the company, stating, "Your package is held in our warehouse." The scam was sent out at the same time that people around the world were ordering and receiving packages for gift-giving holidays. We previously examined similar scams involving UPS, the U.S. Postal Service (USPS), and other package delivery companies. In fact, one of our earlier stories about a FedEx package delivery email scam was published a decade ago. Scammers have been engaging in this activity for a long time. According to a copy of the FedEx email scam that we reviewed, the message originated from [email protected], which is not an official FedEx email address. The message read as follows: "Your package delivery Notification ID#0164278468-735 'Fedex' [email protected] via walisdom.biz Important Message for (name) Your package delivery Notification FedEx Order 29194773US Your package is held in our warehouse. You have (1) package waiting for you in our warehouse, ready for delivery. Use your order number to track and receive your package! TRACK YOUR PACKAGE Order number Order 29194773US Delivery Expected delivery: 1 - 2 days." The tracking number was real, but the package associated with it had already been delivered in April 2022. The scammers sent the email in the hope that people would click the link without verifying the tracking number. We investigated the link in the email and found that it was a phishing scam, meaning the scammers aimed to obtain personal information and financial data. The link in the scam email led to the URL storage.googleapis.com/pemotion/tixrin.html, followed by a long string of additional code likely intended for the scammers' own tracking purposes. Upon clicking the URL, we were directed to mooltay.com, which then redirected to ponnel.com, a website that displayed an "Express" logo without the word "Federal" in front of it. On the ponnel.com scam website, we were guided through a series of questions about the supposed package delivery issue. One step falsely claimed that there would be a $1.95 charge to release the nonexistent package from a customs distribution hub. At the end of the steps, the ponnel.com website redirected to webwinnalists.com, a page that requested personal information and a credit card number. We strongly advise against providing any of these websites with your data. On FedEx.com, the company warns its customers to be on the lookout for scams involving "unexpected requests for money in return for delivery of a package, often with a sense of urgency." That's precisely what this FedEx email scam for a "package delivery notification" entailed. By email, FedEx shared the following statement with us: "FedEx does not send unsolicited text messages or emails to customers requesting money or package or personal information. Unfortunately, scammers often invoke the names of trusted brands when attempting to take advantage of the public, and FedEx is one of many companies whose brand has been abused in this way. Any suspicious text messages or emails should be deleted without being opened and reported to [email protected]." For more tips on detecting online scams, visit the FedEx Customer Protection Center at https://www.fedex.com/us/security/prevent-fraud. This story will be updated if further details come to light. Source: "Recognize & Report Fraud." FedEx.com, https://www.fedex.com/en-us/trust-center/report-fraud.html. Dec. 14, 2022: This story was updated to add a statement from FedEx. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2820 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Does This Photograph Show ICE Arresting Small Children? Claim summaries: Although a photograph of handcuffed children is shared with the claim the youngsters were arrested by ICE, the image is unrelated to immigration.
contextual information: An image circulated on Facebook shows small children in handcuffs being led into a law enforcement vehicle, along with claims that the pictured children were immigrants who had been taken by U.S. Immigration and Customs Enforcement (ICE) as part of the Trump administration's controversial "zero tolerance" policy. Under that policy, migrant parents caught crossing the U.S.-Mexico border between ports of entry were criminally charged and their children taken from them: Although hundreds of immigrant children, including some infants, were taken from their parents, the image seen here is unrelated to that activity. The photograph has been online since 2009 and is associated with a Tea Party protest in West Palm Beach, Florida, during which parents brought their kids for a mock arrest to demonstrate how they are being saddled with debt from government spending. taken The alternate weekly newspaper Broward Palm Beach New Times featured the image in a 14 April 2014 story about the demonstration under the caption "Hopefully the cops won't mistake the protesters for real criminals." The New Times reported of the event that: story If you have children, and you'd like to exploit those children for your political gains, and if you have the money to rent those children prison uniforms, you should totally bring them to downtown West Palm Beach on Wednesday. That's when people protesting government spending will bring 20-30 children dressed in prison uniforms and put them in fake debtor jails. It's meant to show how children will have to pay for wasteful government spending of today. And it's also a great way to ensure continued work for psychologists of tomorrow. The event is part of a nationwide Tea Party demonstration put on by Libertarians, Republicans, and others who think economic stimulus bills are a good occasion to put our children into fake debtor jails. Sid Dinerstein, chairman of the Republican Party of Palm Beach County and an organizer of the event, said the fake jails will be two dimensional, meaning the kids won't actually be held captive at any point. Except by the government's excessive debt. This same photograph was similarly used outside its original context as part of a meme in 2012, but that time it was employed to scare parents about the looming "police state" as behavioral issues in school were being treated as crimes: meme Barton, Eric. "Children with No Financial Future to Be Jailed."
[Broward Palm Beach] New Times. 14 April 2009. Shapiro, Leslie and Manas Sharma. "How Many Migrant Children Are Still Separated from Their Families?"
The Washington Post. 8 August 2018. Ainsley, Julia and Jane C. Timm. "1,995 Children Separated from Families at Border Under 'Zero Tolerance' Policy."
NBC News. 15 June 2018. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2821 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The N. F. L. gave its approval on Monday for the Oakland Raiders to move to Las Vegas, casting aside decades of fears that putting a team in the gambling capital would corrupt the sport, while sending the team to a new and growing market but one that is far smaller. The team owners, meeting in Phoenix, voted overwhelmingly, persuaded that having a team in Las Vegas would allow the league to capitalize on the city’s booming tourist trade and image of excitement, and on its willingness to contribute hundreds of millions of dollars toward the construction of a new stadium. For years, major leagues steered clear of Las Vegas because some owners worried that putting a team there would lead more players and referees to rub elbows with unsavory characters from the gambling world trying to influence games. But such attitudes have faded with the growth and acceptance of gambling around the country, and with the city’s reduced reliance on revenue from its many casinos. The N. H. L. agreed last year to create a team in Las Vegas, the Golden Knights, that will begin play this year. The Raiders, known for a passionate fan base that delights in a image, are likely to begin playing in Las Vegas as soon as 2019, in temporary quarters, with the lease at their current stadium expiring after the 2018 season. In 2020, they are expected to move into a nearly $2 billion stadium, with $750 million in public financing, an arrangement that helped attract the league’s interest. The rest of the money was expected to come from a $600 million loan from Bank of America to the team, $200 million from the league and revenue from naming rights and other deals. “We know that some fans will be disappointed and even angry,†said Mark Davis, the Raiders’ principal owner. “But we hope they do not direct that frustration to the players, coaches and staff. †Libby Schaaf, the mayor of Oakland, said that losing the team would tear at the city’s psyche and pride, and that the league would regret its decision. “The Raider nation is the last of the fan bases, and it absolutely breaks my heart to lose this team,†she said. The team will become the first to leave its home city, return and then leave again. The Raiders are also the third N. F. L. team to move, or announce a move, in a little more than a year, ending a period of turmoil in which the owners agreed to abandon longtime N. F. L. cities that were unable to appease the owners’ desire for bigger markets and more public financing for new stadiums. Last year, the Rams left St. Louis for Los Angeles, and then the Chargers announced that they would leave San Diego to move in with the Rams, starting in the fall. Davis said repeatedly that he was frustrated with the efforts by lawmakers in California to replace the team’s current home, County Coliseum, one of the oldest stadiums in the league. Unlike the Rams and the Chargers, who left immediately for their new homes, the Raiders will remain in Oakland for at least two more seasons while their new home is built, creating the specter of awkward seasons. Davis said the team would continue to be called the Oakland Raiders during that time. Only Stephen M. Ross, the owner of the Miami Dolphins, voted against the deal. He said in a statement after the vote that not all the options to stay in Oakland had been exhausted. Other owners voted reluctantly for the move because, they said, the league would be leaving the television market in the country for the . Oakland is also in the booming San Francisco Bay Area, home to some of the wealthiest fans and sponsors in the country. Las Vegas is recovering from one of the most brutal recessions in its history. Unemployment in Clark County, Nev. was 5. 1 percent in January, compared with 14. 1 percent in 2010. A region that was once the face of the foreclosure crisis is turning around, economists say. Las Vegas, which long led the nation in foreclosures, was ranked No. 22 in February, according to Attom Data Solutions, a housing tracker. The median price of a house in the Las Vegas region was $199, 000 in January, a nearly 5 percent jump over the year before, still a far cry from the booming housing market in Oakland. And revenue from gambling — a key marker for tracking the health of the economy — increased 2. 7 percent statewide compared with six months ago, according to the Center for Gaming Research at the University of Nevada at Las Vegas. The league owners preferred the certainty of a substantial amount of tax dollars for a stadium over uncertain prospects for the team in Oakland, where Ms. Schaaf said often that her city could not afford to pay for the construction of a new stadium. She suggested it could provide the land and infrastructure improvements, and said she was working with Fortress Investments to secure construction financing. Yet in a letter he sent to the mayor last week, Commissioner Roger Goodell said that was not enough, all but sealing the team’s fate. While the league’s stance on Las Vegas has softened, it continues to uphold rules that prevent owners from holding stakes in gambling operations. That was a big reason that Davis ended his dalliance with Sheldon Adelson, the chairman of the Las Vegas Sands Corp. who offered to pay for part of a new stadium in Las Vegas. The Raiders will be the second major team to go to Las Vegas, after the N. H. L. team, and there has been talk of Major League Baseball, M. L. S. and the N. B. A. moving to Las Vegas as well. The moves by the Rams, the Chargers and the Raiders ended a long period of relative stability. They were the first franchises to move in the league since the when the Browns moved to Baltimore, the Rams to St. Louis and the Oilers to Tennessee. The decision to let the teams move has been wrenching and filled with vitriol. Lawmakers in St. Louis approved funding for a new stadium for the Rams, yet the N. F. L. owners rejected their efforts in favor of a proposal by the Rams’ owner, E. Stanley Kroenke, to pay for a $2. 6 billion stadium in Inglewood, Calif. south of downtown Los Angeles. After trying for years to get a new stadium in San Diego, the Chargers applied to move to Los Angeles in 2015. When the owners chose the Rams instead, the Chargers did an and backed a referendum that would have provided hundreds of millions of dollars for a stadium in downtown San Diego. Voters soundly rejected the proposal. The Raiders, though, have a much wider following, in Oakland and across the nation. The team got its start as a charter member of the American Football League in 1960, then went to the N. F. L. when the leagues merged in 1970. After two Super Bowl victories in Oakland, the team owner Al Davis defied the other owners and moved to Los Angeles for the 1982 season, only to return to Oakland in 1995 after the city agreed to expand the Coliseum for him. The team’s tough image delighted the port city’s fans, who earned a reputation for tormenting visiting players. Fans sitting in the “Black Hole,†a cheering section near the field, perpetuated the team’s menacing reputation. But as team after team moved into new stadiums over the last decade, and as the teams’ valuations soared, Mark Davis, who took over ownership when Al Davis died in 2011, started to complain openly about his team’s stadium. The team is the only one in the league that shares a building with a baseball team, the Oakland A’s, and the Raiders are among the teams that generate the least amount of revenue from their home games, lacking the fancy suites and epicurean dining options that other stadiums have. Yet fans continue to flock to their games, including last season, when the team was and, after 13 seasons without a playoff appearance, made the game, in which it lost to the Texans. Now it is Oakland that will be losing the Raiders. Again. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2822 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Highlights of the day for U.S. President Donald Trump’s administration on Thursday: Trump says he wants to build up the U.S. nuclear arsenal to ensure it is at the “top of the pack,†saying the United States has fallen behind in its atomic weapons capacity. [nL1N1G82CF] Mexico expresses “worry and irritation†about U.S. policies to two of Trump’s top officials, giving a chilly reply to the new administration’s hard line on immigration, trade and security. One of California’s most populous counties asks a judge to suspend Trump’s executive order that seeks to withhold federal funds from so-called sanctuary cities for immigrants, saying the directive has thrown its budget process into “disarray.†Trump speaks favorably about an export-boosting border adjustment tax proposal being pushed by Republicans in the U.S. Congress, but does not specifically endorse it. U.S. Treasury Secretary Steven Mnuchin lays out an ambitious schedule to enact tax relief for the middle class and businesses by August, but says the Trump administration is still studying a proposed new border tax on imports. Trump declares China the “grand champions†of currency manipulation, just hours after his new Treasury secretary pledged a more methodical approach to analyzing Beijing’s foreign exchange practices. Trump tells chief executives of major U.S. companies he plans to bring millions of jobs back to the United States, but offers no specific plan on how to reverse a decades-long decline in factory jobs. Trump’s chief strategist, Steve Bannon, known as a forceful influence in the White House, makes a rare public appearance to appeal to conservatives to unite behind the Republican president as he presses his agenda. U.S. Education Secretary Betsy DeVos criticizes as “overreach†former President Barack Obama’s guidelines to public schools to let transgender students use the bathrooms of their choice, one day after Trump revoked the guidance. U.S. companies led by tech firms Yahoo Inc YHOO.O, Apple Inc (AAPL.O) and Microsoft Corp (MSFT.O) criticize the Trump administration’s decision to revoke Obama administration guidance that allowed transgender public school students to use the bathroom of their choice. [nL1N1G81XV] Trump’s administration expects to see greater federal enforcement of laws against the use of marijuana for recreational purposes, White House spokesman Sean Spicer says. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2823 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Wednesday, 16 November 2016
What a week it has been for the Son of the Almighty.
Tuesday, Jesus himself was seen at the Tampa's infamous The Honey Pot night club, a night spot known for its super-hot drag show. A copy of Jesus's bar tab reveals he and his "posse" of Lucifer ( a.k.a "Lu"), Peter and Paul who were in town visiting from Miami's South Beach and his PR-man-cum-handler, John from the New testament, ran up a 2,400-dollar bar tab consisting of bottles of Crystal champagne and bottles of Ciroc vodka.
Since coming out of retirement to handle the End Times (signaled by the candidacy of Donald Trump and the emergence of the second Biblical Beast of Revelation, Mike Pence), Jesus has been quite a man around town, being seen at the hottest, newest and trendiest clubs and some of the seediest backwater bars, often extremely drunk and occasionally abrasive. "The stress is getting to him, sure," his handler, John, confessed. "I mean, his Old Man calls him out of retirement, ends his vacation and tells him he has to restore peace on Earth, and meanwhile he's got Trump and Pence claiming they're actually Christians - yeah, it irritates him. He'll be okay, though. He's got a good resume."
The revelry escalated to the point of Jesus ushering several transvestite dancers behind the silken ropes of his VIP section, where things got admittedly sloppy. "Yeah," The Prince of Darkness, Lucifer, admitted. "Things did spiral out of control, got a little crazy. I'm kind of feeling it today." Lucifer was referring to Jesus's bumping and grinding with his new cross-gendered "friends" and taking body shots off of their surgically implanted breasts.
"Sodom and Gomorrah had nothing on that place, man," The Prince of Peace admitted. "I thought Dad was going to send down the old fire and brimstone by the time Peter and Paul were swinging on the stripper pole."
Though The Almighty didn't set the club ablaze for their transgressions, the pictures of Jesus carousing with his ambiguously gendered friends did set social media on fire. The rumor mill kicked into full gear and people began to question Jesus's "orientation." He seemed to be enjoying his new "friends" from the club a little bit too much.
"I've known Jesus for a very long time," the Apostle Paul said candidly when asked about Jesus's sexual preference. "I know for a fact he's not. I mean you can ask Mary Magdalene, and a whole bunch of other females in the Old World. I mean, he put the 'fertile' in the Fertile Crescent, you know what I mean? And trust me, I know fabulous when I see it."
Long-time lawyer friend, Pontius Pilate, commented: "Absolutely not. Not a chance. That's nothing but slander and libel - and maybe a little wishful thinking on some people's parts. You know everyone wants a piece of a celebrity. But no, he's as straight as the Path of the Righteous. It's this social media. He's not too savvy with, you know? Didn't grow up with it. I've discussed it with him a hundred times. He really needs to be more careful in this day and age."
Jesus himself showed up to a press conference late the next day looking all the worse for the wear. In the press room, he kept his sunglasses on, complaining about the flashing of the cameras and how "damned loud everyone was talking." With a Bloody Mary conspicuously perched in his right hand, Jesus stepped toward the microphone and addressed the crowd about the true intention of his booze-fueled antics, which it turns out was a subtle message to Gay-rights adversary Mike Pence. "I know what we're all here for. I've seen the pictures circulating on social media and, admittedly, they don't look too good. I admit that. Things have been really tense around here lately and I guess I lashed out a bit at the other team, Trump and Pence. You know Pence with his whole Christian thing: 'I'm a Christian, a conservative and a Republican in that order.' What a clown! I admit my disgust got the better of me and I just wanted to piss Pence off. Unfortunately, it got a little crazy. But, hey, what if I was gay? I'm Jesus. I can be gay if I want, and here Pence is screwing with gays in my name. Jerk! Who's this Hoosier from Indiana anyway? I mean, he's not Jesus Christ, I am damn it. He better remember that when it comes to Judgment Day because the Old Man Upstairs isn't too happy about these Christians giving us a bad rep. You know how much PR work that takes to fix up? We're still reeling from Bush and his whole Family Values thing. And Reagan, don't even get me started."
A reporter finally asked the unthinkable: "So you're not gay?"
"I've been around a long time, like a couple millennia, man," Jesus started. "I've seen a lot of things. I'm no prude. I've been to college. We're all adults here. We've all tried things. And I don't judge. That's my dad's job. Me? My philosophy is like what Bill Clinton said: 'Don't ask, don't tell.' At the end of the day, though, Mary and I are going on almost two-thousand years together. I have my kids, good friends like Lu, Peter and Paul, and I have my health, mostly because I'm immortal. To answer your question, no. Not gay. Now if you'll excuse me, I have to go lay hands on myself and fix this hangover." Make Chris Dahl's | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2824 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: This post was originally published on this site
MOSCOW, November 8. /TASS/. Witness in the case of Russian oppositionist Boris Nemtsov’s murder, former worker of a Moscow auto dealership Artyom Trapezin has identified one of the suspects and confirmed selling them a car used by the suspected killers to spy on the politician.
The witness has made this statement at the Moscow District Military Court, which is holding a hearing on the Nemtsov murder case.
According to the witness, suspect Dadayev was going to buy a car with a copy of a passport allegedly for his brother who had had a car accident.
“I earlier saw and talked to Zaur Dadayev. We agreed with him on the price of the car and he drove off for getting money, after which he returned and bought a ZAZ Chance car for 90,000 rubles [$1,400],” Trapezin said.
However, Dadayev rejected this testimony.
“I saw him only in the investigator’s room for the first time. We don’t know each other,” he said.
Nemtsov, former deputy prime minister under then-President Boris Yeltsin, co-chairman of the Parnas party and lawmaker of the Yaroslavl regional legislature, was gunned down in downtown Moscow on February 27, 2015. Five persons were arrested on March 8 last year on suspicion of murdering the politician: Zaur Dadayev, Anzor and Shadid Gubashev, Tamerlan Eskerkhanov and Khamzat Bakhayev.
Depending on their role and the degree of their involvement, they are pressed with charges under part 2, article 105 (“Contract Murder Committed by an Organized Group”) and part 3, article 222 of Russia’s Criminal Code (“Illegal Acquisition, Transfer, Storage, Transportation and Possession of Firearms and Ammunition by an Organized Group”). Article 105 carries a punishment of up to life imprisonment.
The accused persons are denying their complicity in Nemtsov’s murder. The term of their arrest has been extended until December 30.
According to investigators, the men received at least 15 million rubles ($238,000 at the current exchange rate) for the politician’s murder. They started preparing for the killing back in September 2014. The suspected organizer of the murder is Ruslan Mukhudinov, a former officer of the Chechen “Sever” battalion. Mukhudinov has been charged in absentia. He has been on the international wanted list since November 2015. A criminal case against him and other unidentified persons is investigated separately.
In late June, Russia’s Prosecutor General’s Office sent the criminal case to the Moscow District Military Court to review its merits. The defendants have insisted that the murder case should be considered by the board of jurors.
The case is heard by the Moscow District Military Court rather than the Moscow City Court as Zaur Dadayev, one of the suspected perpetrators, was a serviceman of the “Sever” battalion in the North Caucasus republic of Chechnya at the moment when the murder was committed.
{{item.group_date}} | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2825 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: BNI Store Nov 4 2016 “MODERATE” INDONESIA: Protest against a Christian governor turns violent as more than 100,000 Muslims demand death for Christian governor who “blasphemed” Islam JARKARTA: The biggest street protest in years shook this sprawling capital today in a stark display of the more conservative, militant strain of Islam taking hold in the world’s largest Muslim country. ( Which Hillary Clinton has called a “shining example of a ‘moderate’ Islamic country” ) WSJ Police said an estimated 100,000 people turned out for a rally called by hard-line Muslim groups against the capital’s Christian governor, whom they accuse of having committed blasphemy. Blasphemy is a criminal offense in Indonesia and prosecutions have increased in the past decade. President Joko Widodo had met with other political leaders amid calls for calm, but critics say he has been too slow since taking office in 2014 to respond to worsening tension for fear of being labeled anti-Muslim. “Religiosity is rising, especially among the middle class,” said Yon Machmudi, an Islamic politics expert at the University of Indonesia. “A sense of identification is increasing.’’ Protesters were taking aim at Basuki Tjahaha Purnama, known as Ahok, who is the most prominent politician among the country’s often-persecuted, ethnic Chinese minority. He was elected deputy governor in 2012 and elevated to the top job in 2014 after his boss, Mr. Widodo, was elected president. Some hard-liners had tried to block his ascent then, saying Muslims shouldn’t be ruled by a “kafir,” or nonbeliever. Mr. Purnama, now running for re-election, angered the groups again by citing a verse of the Quran in a public address in late September. He has apologized and said he would cooperate with a police investigation, but has since been the target of protests. Vice President Jusuf Kalla met a group of protest leaders and said afterward that police would pursue a blasphemy case against Mr. Purnama. Nearly 90% of Indonesia’s 250 million people are Muslim and are becoming more radical every year as seen by head scarves for women, once rare, are now widely worn and Islamic schools are expanding. A movement to ban alcohol is gaining steam and sales have been banned from convenience stores. Travel to Mecca for the minor pilgrimage of umrah, once a relatively uncommon undertaking for middle-class Indonesians, is newly popular. Security experts say the rising conservatism paves the way for potential violence , pointing to some religious hard-liners who have rebranded themselves as cells of Islamic State. “What we’ve seen in the last 18 months to two years is increasing crossover from organizations that started out ‘nonviolent but hard-line’ to organizations which are now committed to using violence,” said Sidney Jones, director of the Jakarta-based Institute for Policy Analysis of Conflict. Gang of Indonesian Muslim men (below) beat to death members of Ahmadiyah sect, which Muslims reject as part of Islam because of it’s call for non-violence. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2826 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The following people are mentioned as contenders for senior roles as U.S. President-elect Donald Trump puts together his administration before taking office on Jan. 20, according to Reuters sources and other media reports. Trump already has named a number of people for other top jobs in his administration. * Chuck Conner, a former acting secretary of the U.S. Agriculture Department and current head of the National Council of Farmer Cooperatives * Tim Huelskamp, Republican U.S. representative from Kansas * Sid Miller, Texas agriculture commissioner * Sonny Perdue, former Georgia governor * Navy Admiral Mike Rogers, director of the National Security Agency * Ronald Burgess, retired U.S. Army lieutenant general and former Defense Intelligence Agency chief * Robert Cardillo, director of the National Geospatial-Intelligence Agency * Pete Hoekstra, Republican former U.S. representative from Michigan * John Allison, a former chief executive officer of regional bank BB&T Corp and former head of the Cato Institute, a libertarian think tank * Paul Atkins, former SEC commissioner * Thomas Hoenig, Federal Deposit Insurance Corp vice chairman and former head of the Kansas City Federal Reserve Bank * Dr. Scott Gottlieb, a venture capitalist, resident fellow at the American Enterprise Institute and former Food and Drug Administration deputy commissioner * Jim O’Neill, a Silicon Valley investor who previously served in the Department of Health and Human Services * Debra Wong Yang, a former U.S. attorney who was appointed by former President George W. Bush * Ralph Ferrara, a securities attorney at Proskauer Rose LLP * Paul Atkins, a former SEC commissioner who heads Trump’s transition team for independent financial regulatory agencies * Daniel Gallagher, Republican former SEC commissioner The Trump transition team confirmed the president-elect would choose from a list of 21 names he drew up during his campaign, including Republican U.S. Senator Mike Lee of Utah and William Pryor, a federal judge with the 11th U.S. Circuit Court of Appeals. * Dan DiMicco, former CEO of steel producer Nucor Corp * Robert Lighthizer, former deputy U.S. trade representative during the Reagan administration * Wayne Berman, senior executive with private equity and financial services firm Blackstone Group LP * David McCormick, president of investment manager Bridgewater Associates LP * Pete Hegseth, CEO of Concerned Veterans for America and Fox News commentator * Navy Admiral Michelle Howard * Scott Brown, former Republican U.S. senator from Massachusetts * Sarah Palin, former Alaska governor and Republican nominee for vice president in 2008. * Jeff Miller, former Republican U.S. representative from Florida who was chairman of the House Veterans Affairs Committee * Larry Kudlow, economist and media commentator | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2827 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did a Restaurant Customer Leave an Anti-Immigration Note in Lieu of a Tip? Claim summaries: Social media controversy erupted over a diner who purportedly stiffed his waitress and mocked her for being an immigrant.
contextual information: In November 2015, a photograph began circulating online via sites such as Imgur and Facebook, showing a restaurant bill from a customer who purportedly stiffed his waitress and mocked her for being an immigrant. The identity of the original friend of a friend who posted the image wasn't clear, but a FoxNews.com article provided some additional information about the circumstances under which the controversy began. After serving a customer at Bamboo Thai Bistro in Redondo Beach, Calif., an Asian waitress received a short note scribbled on the receipt instead of a tip, according to NBC Los Angeles. It read, "Tip for U.S. citizens only." The server is from Thailand and is in the U.S. legally on a visa with the hope of obtaining a green card one day. According to NBC, on Nov. 11, a male diner paid for his meal of kung pao spaghetti that totaled $22.84, which would have meant the server received $3.43. However, after discovering the nasty note, it's believed another diner snapped a photo of the receipt, which included the man's name, and posted it online. An earlier report from Los Angeles television station KNBC included a brief video segment about the ensuing controversy. Despite massive social media interest in the receipt and its unpleasant message, the man whose name appeared on the slip of paper hasn't responded to media requests for his version of events. He has neither confirmed nor denied that he left the message and hasn't emailed a response to any of the several media outlets covering the viral controversy. Although KNBC included CCTV footage of the man purportedly entering Bamboo Thai Bistro in Redondo Beach, California, on Nov. 11, 2015, that clip didn't definitively indicate he signed a receipt, much less left a rude, anti-immigrant message on a piece of paper that included his full legal name. A report from the Daily Breeze of Los Angeles County's South Bay left it unclear whether the man was a take-out customer or a diner who was waited upon by the server. A 15 percent tip would have been $3.43, but the male customer wrote "Tip for U.S. Citizens Only" on the tip line for his $22.84 receipt for kung pao spaghetti. "It was really bizarre," said the owner, who asked to be identified only as Adison. "She thought she did something wrong. She is one of the best workers here." The man ordered his food and got up and left. "I went outside to do something, and when I came back in, my waitresses were showing me the receipt," Adison said. "This guy left this." Searches for Jason Naglich, restricted to a few days before the Nov. 11, 2015 date supplied by the restaurant, revealed he had no Internet presence to speak of. How a fellow customer who was not part of the transaction came to view the receipt, as the restaurant claimed, was unclear. The restaurant's owner later said he feared litigation as a result of the controversy. So while the story has drawn massive interest from across the country, little about Naglich and the purported receipt, beyond the original assertion, has been confirmed. It's possible that a diner by that name chose to add insult to injury by stiffing his waitress and blaming it on her immigrant status. It's similarly possible that, as with prior claims of this variety, someone somewhere along the line fabricated the slip's message. However, diners swept up in previous hoaxes have quickly spoken up to correct the story once it came to their attention, whereas Naglich has yet to address the rumor. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2828 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: OAKLAND, Calif. — Vilified when he left and celebrated when he returned, LeBron James had spent the past two seasons lugging his city’s championship dreams like a bag of rocks. The weight had only grown more cumbersome — the weight of history, of disappointment, of missed opportunities. James could feel it all on his sturdy shoulders. On Sunday night, before a dazed and defeated crowd at Oracle Arena, James delivered on the grandest stage of his superhuman career, leading the Cleveland Cavaliers to their first championship in franchise history with a victory over the Golden State Warriors in Game 7 of the N. B. A. finals. “I came back for a reason,†James said. “I came back to bring a championship to our city. †James collected 27 points, 11 rebounds and 11 assists to punctuate one of the most remarkable individual performances in finals history. James, who was named the finals’ most valuable player, got ample help from his teammate Kyrie Irving, whose with 53 seconds remaining gave the Cavaliers the lead — and an improbable title. Improbable because the Cavaliers became the first team to rally from a series deficit to win a championship. Improbable because the Warriors, after setting an N. B. A. record with 73 victories in the regular season, had spent months making the case that they were the most dominant team since Dr. James Naismith first affixed a peach basket to a wall. And improbable, above all, because of Cleveland’s ragtag history as an . Not since 1964, when the Browns won the N. F. L. championship, had the city claimed a major sports title. James, who grew up in nearby Akron, has forever changed all of that. He stuffed the series with thunderous dunks and fadeaway jumpers, blocked shots and glowering expressions, towing his teammates along in his ferocious wake. James won two championships with the Miami Heat, but this was his first with the Cavaliers — and his first for Ohio. Not even the Warriors, who were pursuing championships in a repeat of last year’s finals matchup, could slow his march. “The game always gives back to people that are true to the game,†James said. “I’ve watched it. I know the history of the game, and I was just calm. I was calm. †Irving finished with 26 points for the Cavaliers, who survived three elimination games. In Cleveland, fans jammed the streets around Quicken Loans Arena for a watch party from afar. Draymond Green had 32 points, 15 rebounds and 9 assists for the Warriors, and Stephen Curry scored 17 points but shot just 6 of 19 from the field. In the final minute, Curry missed a attempt that would have tied the game. James, who had made a soaring block of Andre Iguodala’s layup attempt with less than two minutes to play, then made 1 of 2 free throws with 10. 6 seconds left to seal the win. The Cavaliers formed a raucous mob at the buzzer — joy and disbelief, all at once. On the postgame dais, James clutched the championship trophy to his chest and choked back tears. At his news conference, he wore one of the nets around his neck. he said he was looking forward to the victory parade, scheduled for Wednesday. He invited everyone, including the media. “It’s going to be the biggest party that Cleveland has ever seen,†said James, who averaged 29. 7 points, 11. 3 rebounds and 8. 9 assists during the series. “If you guys still have a little money left over in your budget, you guys better make a trip to Cleveland and get a little piece of it. †From the moment the Warriors set about stalking the Chicago Bulls for the best record in league history, they cautioned that it would mean almost nothing without a championship, too. The Warriors were greedy — they wanted all the records, all the wins and another trophy at the end. “We’re stunned,†Coach Steve Kerr said. “We thought we were going to win. †The Warriors found their postseason journey to be more jagged than they imagined. The tenor of the team’s chase was jarred off course in the first game of the playoffs, when Curry injured his right ankle. Three games later, he slipped on a wet spot against the Houston Rockets, spraining his right knee. Though Curry eventually returned to help guide the Warriors back to the finals, thanks in part to a dramatic comeback against the Oklahoma City Thunder in the Western Conference finals, Curry lacked his usual consistency. More trouble brewed against the Cavaliers. Green had to watch Game 5 from a baseball stadium after he was suspended for collecting too many flagrant fouls. Andrew Bogut, their starting center, injured his knee and missed the final two games of the series. Iguodala, James’s primary defender, tweaked his back in Game 6. As for Curry, his finals experience was an obstacle course of defenders (he shot 40. 3 percent from the field) spats with officials (he chucked his mouth guard after he was ejected from Game 6) and volleys from critics, who took jabs at everything from his poor shooting to his choice of sneakers. Game 7 was another slog. “It will haunt me for a while,†Curry said, “because it means a lot to me to try to lead my team and do what I need to do on the court and the big stages. Done it before. Didn’t do it tonight. †The Cavaliers were no strangers to adversity. Sensing what he described as dysfunction, General Manager David Griffin fired the team’s head coach, David Blatt, midway through the season and replaced him with Tyronn Lue, one of Blatt’s assistants. Griffin made the move even though the Cavaliers were sitting firmly atop the Eastern Conference standings. It was championship or bust for these Cavaliers, who, make no mistake, were formed in James’s shadow. Not that his journey was without its share of hard feelings and trapdoors. Drafted by the Cavaliers in 2003, James splashily left for the Heat as a free agent in 2010. Fans who felt scorned by his departure burned replicas of his jersey in the streets of Cleveland. But James rejoined with the Cavaliers in 2014, vowing to lift the franchise to new heights, to do something that had never been done. “I don’t think people imagined it this way — the route that we’ve taken — and that’s fine,†James said Saturday. “Like I always say, every day is not a bed of roses, and you have to figure out how to get away from the thorns and the things of that nature to make the sunshine. †Nobody seemed consumed by the pressure. Kerr arrived at the arena following his usual session of hot yoga with Luke Walton, one of his assistants. The crowd stood from the opening minutes. After James batted an attempted layup by Curry into an expensive row of courtside seats, Curry got in James’s face. An official had to separate them. Green, meanwhile, went 5 of 5 from range and scored 22 points to guide the Warriors to a halftime lead. The Cavaliers rallied in the third quarter. After Curry committed a turnover, Irving raced away for an acrobatic layup, drawing a foul for good measure. His free throw gave the Cavaliers a lead. A small subset of fans at Oracle started chanting, “Let’s go, Cavs!†But neither team could find any separation, at least not until James and Irving emerged in the closing moments — not until it mattered most. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2829 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The nicest thing I own is the first thing you see when you walk into my house: a red handmade rug bought in Tehran, haggled over in Farsi and delivered, in person, to the Brooklyn apartment of the man who would become my husband. Back then, James told me the woman who gave him the rug, a woman he had recently dated, was by then “just a friend. †I didn’t believe men and women could be “just friends. †At least not if they were single, with one or both actively seeking a romantic partner. Yet I also agreed to be “just friends†with James, at first. I was the one who contacted him. We had both joined a dating service called, pretentiously enough, The Right Stuff, after seeing an ad for it in The New Yorker. “I liked your profile,†he wrote in his first email, “but didn’t contact you because you have a child. †At least he didn’t write, as several others had, “Thank you for being so honest. †It’s a line that makes you ask yourself: How could a mother lie about being a mother? Not ethically, but logistically? Maybe a liar would wait until the man is smitten, then spring the child on him and shout, “Surprise!†But to what end? I had tried to meet other single parents. I met a man who about the $ child support his demanded for his daughters’ clothing allowance. I met another who asked how much I weighed, as if I were a chicken he was considering for a recipe. Then there was the man who told me about his summer plans to share a house with other singles on Fire Island. “Do you do that every year?†I asked. He let out of a puff of air. “Of course not. Next year I’ll be married. †“Married to who?†I asked. “I don’t know yet. †Meeting my eyes over his mojito, he said, “Maybe to you. †I also met plenty of nice men with whom I had nothing in common except similar philosophies on effective potty training. So when I saw the Right Stuff ad, I thought: At least someone I meet through an ad in The New Yorker will be someone who reads The New Yorker, and we’d have that to talk about. Maybe I could find a man who reads the arts listings, and maybe even (if I could be this lucky) the poetry and fiction. I did. He was JamesNYC125. I was RedWeather. He responded to my first email: “A redheaded editor in Brooklyn — what could be better? But dating a woman with a child would be complicated, as I’m sure you know. †I did. “Let’s not date,†he suggested. “Let’s just get together as friends. †That summer we both had travel plans, so a whole month passed before our first date — or our first “playdate,†I guess. In the meantime, we emailed every day. I sent him poems. He sent me music. Even while discussing academic publishing, from my side as an editor and his as a researcher, we couldn’t help flirting. An economist, he would answer a question with: “Probability of 1. †“I love it when you talk math talk,†I’d say. And he would reply, “I can do it any time you want. †Our first meeting was on Smith Street. We talked books, then strolled to BookCourt, slid a novel off the shelf and read passages aloud. His timing was perfect, his voice what I’d hoped it would be from the emails. “I’d love to walk with you on the promenade,†he said, and then sneezed. “But I should nurse my cold. †I wanted to nurse his cold, too. I wanted to boil him a pot of tea and kiss him. Later I did, leaning against a car parked at a meter outside an elementary school. We both pretended I hadn’t. The next morning, he called to ask me to a modern dance performance in two weeks. We both lived in Brooklyn but met, for the second time, in Manhattan. His hand grazed my thigh in the dark, a moment I would replay over and over in my head. For our third I suggested attending a concert on a barge docked near the Brooklyn Heights Promenade. Our knees touched in our cozy seats two rows from the string quartet. Next we hiked Bear Mountain. “I didn’t think a skinny girl like you could outpace me,†he said. Then later: “I’m only letting you walk ahead so I can get a good view from back here. †So I vamped my hips. When we removed our hiking boots and socks in the car, we stared at each other’s naked feet. No. 5 was dinner at my place. Back then, the nicest thing I owned was also the first thing you saw when you entered: a red futon couch. I chose the cover from the remnants section of a fabric store on the Lower East Side. It was something I could unzip and clean whenever a child spit up, spilled Cheerios or wiped peanut butter on it. When I pulled a book off the shelf to show James, the Pokémon cards I used for bookmarks fell out. Later, we found ourselves in bed. Finally. And that’s when he confessed, “I’m dating someone else. †She was a fellow economist he had met at a conference around the same time he met me, an who lived in Washington, D. C. “Now you tell me?†“You knew we could only be friends. †“You have sex with all your friends?†I removed his hand from my belly. “I bet she doesn’t even know about me. †I told him we had to either date or not see each other again. We were both traveling for Thanksgiving, so we decided not to email or phone until we returned home. Then he would call and tell me which woman he chose. Somehow I had turned myself into a contestant, a version of one of those “Bachelor†shows my friends watch. I flew to Austin, Tex. to share the holiday with my brother. “I’ve met the one,†I said. “Just because it sounds corny doesn’t mean it isn’t true. †“Does he feel the same way?†my brother asked. I asked myself that question from the time I woke up until the time I went to bed, and sometimes in the middle of the night, too. James and I had emailed every day for months, long letters detailing our whole lives. I kept checking my inbox in Austin, though I knew it would come up empty. On the flight home, I tried to imagine my competitor. She grew up in the center of an ancient civilization. I grew up in Detroit. Her furniture probably smelled like an exotic perfume, not peanut butter. She was not a single mother. He had already informed me about how complicated dating a single mother could be. Did I even have a chance? Trying to think like a statistician, I put my odds at . Or, as an economist would say: probability 0. 5. Minutes after I arrived home, James called. “I choose you,†he said. I dropped the phone and fell onto the bare floor. Weeks later, he buzzed me up to his apartment. The door opened to reveal the most beautiful rug I had ever seen, so finely woven it was more like a tapestry. The kind of precious object that could be ruined by a few stray Cheerios crumbs. “It’s a gift from a friend,†he said. “She bought it when she visited her family in Iran. †“She’s trying to get you back,†I said. “What? She’s just being kind. Don’t you love it?†“Sure. †I loved imagining what I would do to it after it collected enough dust. I’d take it outside, hang it and beat it with a stick. But James turned out to be right. Sometimes a rug is just a rug. And sometimes men and women can be friends, even after they have been romantically involved. Rug Woman never tried to win him back. Time passed, and I asked James if he ever wished he had chosen her. “No,†he said. “You’re perfect for me. †Right. I wasn’t the kind of person who would fantasize about walloping a beautiful rug. At least I wasn’t anymore. Months later, James met my son, Jonah. I cooked Jonah’s favorite, “chicken with crumbs,†and after our dessert of apple crisp, we played Clue. The next day, Jonah asked, “Can I have another playdate with my new friend?†“Which one?†“James. †Now we share the rug. It holds a place of honor in the house James and I bought together. We wipe our feet on the porch before crossing the threshold, food is banned from the entryway, and I vacuum it with care. I treat the rug as we all deserve to be treated. Like a friend. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2830 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A U.S. military service member died as a result of injuries and six others were wounded after a helicopter crashed in Logar province south of the Afghan capital Kabul late on Friday, the NATO-led resolute Support mission said in a statement. It said the crash was not the result of enemy action and the crash site had been secured. Resolute Support is investigating the circumstances of the crash to determine more facts and will release relevant details as appropriate, it said in a statement. The incident came amid a buildup of U.S. troops in Afghanistan as part of the administration s new strategy to step up the fight against the Taliban and other insurgent groups. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2831 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Warren Buffett is closely monitoring whether U.S. President Donald Trump can lower corporate taxes, one of the rare times the billionaire has looked to Washington to help him decide which stocks to buy and sell. “It’s an actual factor at Berkshire,†Buffett, the chairman of Berkshire Hathaway Inc (BRKa.N), said in a Tuesday interview with CNBC television. “And it’s very, very, very seldom in my 87 years that it has ever been a factor.†Buffett normally buys stocks for the long term with less focus on tax issues. But when asked if he was thinking about taxes, he said “I think about them plenty†now. “We’ve got actions on both sides that we would take,†referring to taking gains or realizing losses, he said. Berkshire has said it ended June with more than $135 billion of equity investments, which Buffett mainly controls and holds for the long term. The conglomerate is sitting on huge gains in big investments such as American Express Co (AXP.N), Coca-Cola Co (KO.N) and Wells Fargo & Co (WFC.N), while other bets such as International Business Machines Corp (IBM.N) have fared less well. Buffett had said at Berkshire’s annual meeting in Omaha, Nebraska, on May 6 that he would rather realize losses than take gains if he expected rates to fall. That might be a good strategy now, if Trump and many congressional Republicans succeeded in lowering the top corporate tax rate to 20 percent from 35 percent. Buffett explained that he would “feel kind of silly†realizing a $1 billion gain and paying $350 million in taxes, only to have Congress lower the rate and thus his tax bill. He said other investors sitting on “hundreds of billions†of dollars of potential profits might be thinking the same thing. It is unclear whether the Republican-controlled Congress can pass a tax bill that Trump will sign, and Buffett said it has been unable to overhaul the Affordable Care Act or move forward on infrastructure, two of the president’s priorities. He expects to know by year end whether taxes are going down. “I would think the Republicans controlling both houses [of Congress] and the presidency, they would not want to have a shutout, in their first year,†Buffett said. “I think they can get it done.†| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2832 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Vanishing dependents Claim summaries: Did several million dependents disappear from income tax returns in 1987?
contextual information: Several million fewer dependents were claimed on federal income tax returns the year the IRS started requiring taxpayers to list the Social Security numbers of their children. I had read at some point that millions of dependents dropped off the 1040 forms the year that the IRS required Social Security numbers. This seems incredibly high, but I know that it was a fact that many divorced parents were both claiming the same children as dependents, and some people were even claiming their pets.
The U.S. federal income tax code requires residents to be responsible for their own taxes; that is, it's up to each taxpayer to calculate their income, determine their allowable deductions, and file a tax return with the Internal Revenue Service (or hire someone to do it for them). Such a system allows (some say it even encourages) taxpayers to cheat, engaging in everything from blurring the line between business and personal expenses to hiding large amounts of unreported income. Although tax fraud may never be completely eliminated, the increasing use of automated record-keeping and tracking technology has made many of the more common cheating schemes quite difficult, if not impossible, to execute successfully these days.
Given how often we're asked to provide our Social Security numbers (they seem to be used for just about everything these days), those of us who began paying federal income tax only in the last twenty years might be surprised to discover that not until 1987 did the IRS begin requiring taxpayers to include the Social Security numbers of all dependent children claimed on their returns. After all, listing phony dependents in order to claim illegitimate extra deductions has historically been one of the more common forms of tax fraud, so it makes sense that the IRS would always have wanted to track such information as closely as possible.
This is the notion behind the legend made familiar to many readers by the 2005 best-seller Freakonomics that the year the IRS began asking taxpayers to provide Social Security numbers for all dependent children, the number of claimed dependents suddenly dropped significantly: some cheating leaves barely a shadow of evidence. In other cases, the evidence is massive. Consider what happened one spring evening at midnight in 1987: seven million American children suddenly disappeared. The worst kidnapping wave in history? Hardly. It was the night of April 15, and the Internal Revenue Service had just changed a rule. Instead of merely listing each dependent child, tax filers were now required to provide a Social Security number for each child. Suddenly, seven million children—children who had existed only as phantom exemptions on the previous year's 1040 forms—vanished, representing about one in ten of all dependent children in the United States.
The "seven million" figure appears to be accurate, as noted in a December 2000 National Tax Journal article by Jeffrey B. Liebman that drew its data from a 1990 Internal Revenue Service conference report. Another way in which taxpayers without children might claim a dependent child is to invent a fictional one. The strongest evidence for this possibility is that in 1987, the first year in which taxpayers were required to list Social Security numbers of dependents on their tax returns, seven million fewer dependent children were claimed than in the previous year. The suggestion by the Freakonomics authors that most or all of that drop in the number of dependents claimed in 1987 was directly attributable to fraud was an obvious one but not necessarily the only one, as alternative explanations could have accounted for a substantial portion of the reduction in the number of claimed dependents.
For example, it was not until 1987 that the IRS first demonstrated a program to allow parents to automatically obtain Social Security numbers for their newborn children when those births were registered, and the program did not become nationwide until 1989. Since the average citizen doesn't generally keep abreast of all the changes made to the tax code from year to year until they directly affect them, perhaps many taxpayers sat down to fill out their returns in 1987 and didn't realize until it was too late that they had never applied for Social Security numbers for their children.
However, the assumption that many taxpayers had previously claimed non-existent children until the newly implemented Social Security number requirement made it much more difficult for them to safely do so is certainly an obvious one, and seems to be supported by additional information provided by Liebman. Further evidence that nonexistent children may have been claimed comes from the 1988 TCMP [Taxpayer Compliance Measurement Program]. In 1988, taxpayers were required to list on their tax returns the Social Security numbers of all dependents who were at least five years old. On tax returns where the TCMP auditor disallowed an EITC [Earned Income Tax Credit] claim, 39 percent of the disallowed dependent child claims were dependents for whom the taxpayer checked the box stating the child was under five and did not provide a Social Security number—possibly because the children did not exist.
Likewise, although follow-up reports in subsequent years noted that some portion of the previously claimed dependents who went "missing" in the 1987 tax year were indeed real people who were not claimed as dependents in 1987 for reasons other than their being fictitious (e.g., they were children who had in earlier years been unlawfully claimed as dependents by each of two divorced parents), the pattern of disappearing dependents in 1987 was indicative of widespread fraud. Starting in 1987, the IRS required that taxpayers report the Social Security number of all dependents over the age of five. That year, seven million American children disappeared from the nation's tax returns, representing a 9 percent drop in the 77 million dependents claimed the previous year and $2.9 billion more in yearly tax revenue. The tax agency said about 20 percent of the vanished dependents were children who had been claimed as dependents by both parents after a divorce. Under the law, only one parent may claim the child as a deduction. Most of the others probably never existed, John Szilagyi, an IRS researcher, said.
Some families apparently became quite greedy in creating dependents, each worth a $1,080 deduction in 1986 and $1,900 in 1987. About 66,000 taxpayers who claimed four or more dependents in 1986 claimed none in 1987, after the Social Security identification rule went into effect. More than 11,000 families claimed seven or more dependents in 1986 but none in 1987. Those returns are now under investigation, with more than 1,000 audits in which the 1986 dependents were disallowed, and back taxes and fines collected. Mr. Szilagyi said some cases of apparent fraud have also been referred to the authorities for criminal investigation.
"In any individual family, you can imagine that one or two children might legitimately have stopped being dependents in 1987, but it's hard to imagine a legitimate situation in which a taxpayer had seven dependents one year and none the next," said Mr. Szilagyi, who drafted the proposal to require Social Security numbers from dependents and babysitters. Mr. Szilagyi said his research indicates that there are probably four million to five million more dependents being claimed illegally, either because they are fictitious or do not legally qualify as dependents. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2833 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Providence has more of its pension fund invested in hedge funds and is less transparent about it than the state.
contextual information: Rhode Island General Treasurer Gina Raimondo has come under fire because, on her recommendation, the State Investment Commission, in 2012, put more pension money in hedge funds. Critics say the funds, which are designed to retain value or increase in value for large investors when the overall market is performing poorly, are risky and charge exorbitant rates. On Oct. 21, aftera reportcommissioned by the largest state employees union accused Raimondo of selling out Rhode Island's public workers and retirees for an opportunity to enrich herself and her hedge fund backers, Raimondo sent out a fundraising letter trying to put the investment strategy in perspective. One portion focused on Providence's pension fund, overseen by Mayor Angel Taveras, a declared candidate for governor who is expected to face Raimondo in a Democratic primary. Providence has more of its pension fund invested in hedge funds and is less transparent and yet isnt included in the [union-financed] report because this is about attacking one individual and a comprehensive reform, she said. We wondered whether her points about hedge funds and transparency were accurate. Looking at how much each fund is investing in hedge funds, themost recent monthly numbersshow that, as of Sept. 30, Raimondo is correct on a percentage basis. The report, available on the treasurer's website, says 14.2 percent of Rhode Islands $7.8 billion retirement account is invested in hedge funds. In Providence, hedge funds on Sept. 30 made up 16.6 percent of the $241 million in Providence's retirement account,according to a city report. That's nearly two and a half percentage points higher than the states ratio. However, when Providence made part of its annual required pension contribution nine days later, that percentage dropped to about 14.3 percent, virtually identical to the state ratio. (The value of the hedge funds hadnt declined, only their percentage of the overall fund. When the city made the rest of its annual contribution, the ratio dropped to 13.2 percent, according to city spokesman David Ortiz, who noted that Taveras is trying to move away from hedge funds while Raimondo has embraced them.) So whether Raimondo is correct or not depends on when you look. Raimondo's office said her fundraising letter was based on aMay 8, 2013, blog postat WPRI.com, which reported that Providence had just under 20 percent of its pension money invested in hedge funds at a time when the state's ratio was 14.6 percent. The media report from May 2013 was the only information that we could publicly find regarding Providences investment allocation to hedge funds, said Collin Berglund, spokesman for Friends of Gina Raimondo. That has changed. After Raimondo made her comment and PolitiFact called Providence to check it on Oct. 23, the city posted more of its retirement fund data online, including the Sept. 30 numbers and an Oct. 22 tally that included the $33 million infusion of cash from the city that made hedge funds an even smaller slice of the retirement pie. Which brings us to the issue of transparency. Raimondo's office has bragged about its openness because detailed information about the investments is posted on the general treasurer's website. Raimondo has also, for the first time, included information on the hidden fees that some funds charge the state and most states don't report. City spokesman Ortiz responded in an Oct. 24 email: Reports prepared by our pension investment advisers have always been provided to the media without any redaction, and are now publicly available on the citys open data portal:https://data.providenceri.gov/. He said that Raimondo has denied public records requests and redacted key data regarding fees and performance for some investments. He did not respond when we pressed him for specifics. But earlier this year, Raimondos office denied a request by The Providence Journal to see certain details that each hedge fund gives to the state, saying it is bound by contractual confidentiality agreements.An Aug. 4, 2013 Journal storyreported that much of that information was redacted from documents Raimondos office provided to the newspaper. When we asked Raimondo's office about Ortiz's allegations about disclosure, spokeswoman Joy Fox said in the few instances where information has been withheld, it had to be kept secret to avoid violating contracts. We found some hedge fund report information on the Providence website that seemed to offer more detail than what Raimondo offered, but it's not clear whether the report was available before PolitiFact began inquiring about Raimondo's claim about openness. Our ruling Rhode Island General Treasurer Gina Raimondo said Providence has more of its pension fund invested in hedge funds than the state does and is less transparent about it. Based on the Sept. 30 financial statements, the first part of Raimondo's statement would have been true. The city had 16.6 percent of its pension money in hedge funds, compared with the states 14.2 percent. That's no longer true because Providence subsequently made its annual pension payment, increasing the proportion of non-hedge fund investments. But that information was not public at the time Raimondo made her statement. On the issue of disclosure, the city has released pension information when asked, but theres much more pension information -- particularly historical information -- widely available to the public on the states website. Raimondos statement was accurate on Sept. 30, but recognizing that a key element had changed by the time she made it on Oct. 21, we rate itMostly True. (If you have a claim youd like PolitiFact Rhode Island to check, e-mail us at[email protected]. And follow us on Twitter: @politifactri.) | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2834 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: 'Freedom Concert' Being Planned, But No Details Announced Claim summaries: Some concert promoters are toying with the idea of a "Freedom Concert," but no official plans have yet been announced.
contextual information: In December 2016, an image purportedly showing a flyer for a "Freedom Concert" was widely circulated on social media. This is not a real flyer for a "Freedom Concert." The image displayed above is a concept poster that has been circulating since at least December 20, 2016, when it was posted to Facebook by Adam Theis. He wrote, "Please share if you would like to see this concert happen on the same day as the inauguration. It's as simple as that. #freedomconcert." The poster design/concept was created by Erik Brown of FRISK Creative. While this image does not advertise a genuinely scheduled event, a real "Freedom Concert" to be held on Inauguration Day was discussed on social media in December 2016, with former Labor Secretary Robert Reich bringing attention to the idea when he explained the vision behind such an event in an 18 December 2016 Facebook post. He stated, "The Trump people are upset that the only musicians willing to perform at the Trump inauguration are Kid Rock and Ted Nugent. Someone just suggested to me a televised 'freedom concert' to air at the same time as the inauguration, with huge celebrities like Beyoncé, Jay Z, Madonna, Katy Perry, Justin Timberlake, Lady Gaga, Bruce Springsteen, and so on. Alec Baldwin would MC the event, playing Trump as he does on SNL. Presto. The Trump inauguration loses all the TV ratings. Basically, no one watches it. Even better, the proceeds of the freedom concert go to the ACLU, Planned Parenthood, Lambda Legal, NAACP, Common Cause, CAIR, IRAP, SPLC, Environmental Defense Fund, Human Rights Campaign Fund, MoveOn, Economic Policy Institute, Inequality Media, and GLAD. What do you think?" Reich's idea proved popular with some people, and at least one concert promoter was reportedly attempting to turn this idea into a real event. According to Politico's Playbook, Mark Ross, a concert promoter, was "in the process of putting together a large-scale concert called We the People to DIRECTLY compete with Donald Trump's inauguration." However, Ross has not provided any details about the event, and while a Politico source said that talent was "banging on our doors" to be involved with the event, no musical acts have officially been confirmed to play the show as of this writing. Ross confirmed that he was planning a concert in a December 23, 2016, Facebook post in which he mentioned he was "getting together a really big show. Stay tuned," although he later deleted that message. Although the flyer for this "Freedom Concert" is not real, a similar event called "Concert for America: Stand Up, Sing Out!" scheduled for Inauguration Day has been announced. The concert's website states that the event will be a "star-studded benefit concert highlighting the diversity and hope that is America at its best." The lineup for this concert, however, was not the same as that promoted in the faux "Freedom Concert" flyer. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2835 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The Syrian government on Wednesday condemned U.S. President Donald Trump s decision to recognize the city of Jerusalem as the capital of Israel and to move the U.S. Embassy there from Tel Aviv, Syrian state news agency SANA said. (The move) is the culmination of the crime of usurping Palestine and displacing the Palestinian people, SANA said, quoting a Foreign Ministry source. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2836 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Who is responsible for the escalation of the debt? Claim summaries: A chart from 2011 compared changes in the U.S. national debt over the last several presidencies.
contextual information: Debt is typically a major campaign issue in elections, from the municipal level all the way up to the office of the President of the United States. Candidates tout their accomplishments in balancing budgets or reducing government debt as examples of fiscal prudence while pointing to increased debts during their opponents' administrations as indicators of profligate and wasteful spending of taxpayers' money. The chart reproduced above, which was posted to the Flickr account of House Minority Leader Nancy Pelosi, attempts to reverse conventional political stereotypes by portraying recent Republican presidents as responsible for significant increases in the national debt, while showing recent Democratic presidents as responsible for much lower increases in the level of debt. As a first step in evaluating this chart, we must determine the applicable definition of "debt." In general, the term "public debt" (or "debt held by the public") refers to money borrowed by the government through the issuance and sale of securities, government bonds, and bills. It includes federal debt held by all investors outside of the federal government, including individuals, corporations, state or local governments, the Federal Reserve banking system, and foreign governments. Another form of debt is "intragovernmental debt" (or "debt held by government accounts"), which refers to money that the government has borrowed from itself, such as when the U.S. government invests money from federal savings programs like Medicare and the Social Security trust fund by purchasing its own treasury securities. A variety of names have been applied to the total of these two forms of debt, including "gross federal debt," "total public debt," and "national debt." Although this chart is labeled as presenting a "percent increase in public debt," it actually uses figures corresponding to the total described as "gross federal debt" above (i.e., a combination of debt held by the public and debt held by government accounts, rather than just the former). We checked the numbers in this chart by using (for pre-1993 years) the U.S. Treasury's Monthly Statement of the Public Debt (MSPD), noting the total debt reported as of January 31 of each relevant year, and (for 1993 onwards) the Treasury's The Debt to the Penny and Who Holds It application, noting the total debt reported as of Inauguration Day of each relevant year. From these records, we gleaned the following information: Ronald Reagan: Took office January 1981. Total debt: $848 billion. Left office January 1989. Total debt: $2,698 billion. Percent change in total debt: +218%. George H.W. Bush: Took office January 1989. Total debt: $2,698 billion. Left office January 20, 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billion. Percent change in total debt: +55%. Bill Clinton: Took office January 20, 1993. Total debt: $4,188 billion. Left office January 20, 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billion. Percent change in total debt: +37%. George W. Bush: Took office January 20, 2001. Total debt: $5,728 billion. Left office January 20, 2009. Total debt: $10,627 billion. Percent change in total debt: +86%. Barack Obama: Took office January 20, 2009. Total debt: $10,627 billion. Total debt (as of the end of April 2011): $14,288 billion. Percent change in total debt: +34%. So, as far as raw numbers go, the chart is reasonably accurate (although our calculations produced a somewhat higher debt increase for Ronald Reagan than reported). That said, we must consider how valuable these numbers are; whether by themselves they present a reasonable comparative measure of presidential fiscal responsibility. In that regard, one could find several aspects to take issue with: The chart isn't a true comparison of equals, as it includes three presidents who served two full terms (Reagan, Clinton, and George W. Bush), a president who served one term (George H.W. Bush), and a president who served half a term (Obama). Obviously, the longer a president holds office, the greater the opportunity for him to influence the debt, and certainly (barring a radical change in current circumstances) the increase reported for Barack Obama would be considerably higher by the time he left office. All presidents come into office with policies and budgets that were put into place by their predecessors in the White House and Congress, and they all pass the same along to their successors when they leave office. Therefore, determining how much of the change in debt that occurs during a given president's administration is actually the result of his actions (rather than the consequence of factors over which he had little or no influence) would require a much more complex analysis than the one presented here. Which is the best measure of debt for this purpose: public debt, intragovernmental debt, or a combination of the two? As noted in the General Accounting Office's FAQ on Federal Debt, they represent rather different concepts: Debt held by the public approximates current federal demand on credit markets. It represents a burden on today's economy, and the interest paid on this debt represents a burden on current taxpayers. Federal borrowing from the public absorbs resources available for private investment and may put upward pressure on interest rates. Further, debt held by the public is the accumulation of what the federal government borrowed in the past and is reported as a liability on the balance sheet of the government's consolidated financial statements. In contrast, debt held by government accounts (intragovernmental debt) and the interest on it represent a claim on future resources. This debt performs largely an internal accounting function. Special federal securities credited to government accounts (primarily trust funds) represent the cumulative surpluses of these accounts that have been lent to the general fund. These transactions net out on the government's consolidated financial statements. Debt issued to government accounts does not affect today's economy and does not currently compete with the private sector for available funds in the credit market. Are plain percentage changes in the national debt level a useful figure, or do they need to be placed in context to have relevance? Some would argue, for example, that the Debt-to-GDP ratio is a better measure of economic health relative to the national debt than raw debt figures alone, and a chart that tracked the change in that ratio over the last several presidencies would paint a significantly different picture of debt levels than the one displayed above. All in all, this is a case of relatively accurate information that is of marginal value due to a lack of proper comparative context. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2837 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Your tellers were paid kickbacks for directing elderly consumers from ... safe deposits to risky ones.
contextual information: One of the most heated exchanges between Rick Scott and Alex Sink at their third and final gubernatorial debate on Oct. 25, 2010, centered on fraud.But it was Sink, not Scott, in the hot seat.After Sink brought up Scott's time running Columbia/HCA and the hospital company's convictions and $1.7 billion in fines for defrauding Medicare and Medicaid, Scott turned the tables on the former bank executive.Look, you want to talk about fraud. Let's talk about your job at NationsBank, Scott said. Your tellers were paid kickbacks, your tellers in your bank were paid kickbacks for directing elderly consumers from ...Scott stopped in mid-thought because he saw Sink smiling.You want to smile about it? Scott asked.Am I going to have an opportunity to respond? Sink turned and asked the moderators, CNN's John King and theSt. Petersburg Times'Adam C. Smith. But before King or Smith could answer, Scott pressed on.Let me finish and make sure you understand what the issue is. Your tellers were paid kickbacks -- OK. Your tellers were paid kickbacks for -- OK, you think it's funny for these seniors that you sent from safe deposits to risky ones, Scott said. All right, you were sued -- your bank was sued and you paid fines. That's called fraud. So I have a whole list -- you want to talk about fraud, I can give you a list of them.We've examined in detail Scott's time and role in the fraud investigation at Columbia/HCA, so we thought it fair to delve into Sink's banking background, and the allegations of fraud at NationsBank -- which is now Bank of America.Sink, the state chief financial officer, is a banker by profession. She came to Florida in 1989 and became president of NationsBank Florida in November 1993. She served in that role until early 1998, when she became president of the bank's private client group. In 2000, NationsBank merged with Bank of America. Sink left Bank of America that same year in an executive shake-up.The roots of the allegations Scott is talking about stretch back to 1994 and originate in Florida.That year, a stockbroker with a NationsBank subsidiary, NationsSecurities, went public with what he described as an orchestrated nationwide scheme to get bank customers to move investments from safe, federally insured accounts to more risky brokerage and mutual funds.Florida-based NationsSecurities broker David Cray said the bank and its securities arm intentionally blurred the lines between its traditional banking business and its securities business and misled customers into thinking those securities investments were protected by the bank or the federal government. The scheme permeated the entire bank, Cray, and later others, said. Brokers were given sales scripts to try to convince bank customers to move their money into more risky securities.A NationsSecurities senior manager said employees should use the phrase SPR which stood for safety, predictability and return when discussing the mutual funds, according to the findings of a subsequent Securities and Exchange Commission investigation. A sales script the company used said the investments provided certainty in an uncertain world, and NationsSecurities branch managers also encouraged employees to use fear to sell securities. In one orientation sales meeting, a manager suggested that a broker could ask customers: Is this your risky money or safe money? If this is risky, I know a guy at Merrill or Dean Witter.NationsBank helped NationsSecurities by providing brokers lists of customers with Certificates of Deposit about to mature, according to the SEC's findings.Why was the bank pushing the mutual fund investments and its securities side business? According to Cray and others, NationsBank received lucrative fees for the mutual funds its subsidiary managed.The allegations led to a class-action lawsuit against NationsBank of Florida, NationsSecurities and others, from investors who lost money by unknowingly making the risky investments, which in the end lost money. Along with the SEC, the Department of Justice also opened an investigation. The results of those investigations support Scott's claim that bank tellers were being paid for referring customers to the securities side of the business.The SEC concluded that NationsBank tellers were provided incentives to refer customers to NationsSecurities stock brokers. If the NationsSecurities broker got a customer to buy into the mutual fund, the teller who made the referral would receive a 5 percent commission. In some instances, bank employees substantially increased their monthly compensation during this period by making referrals to NationsSecurities, the SEC found.The SEC fined NationsSecurities$4 millionin 1998 for its role in misleading bank customers.NationsBank ended up paying civil fines of $6.4 million and $6.75 million to the federal government in 2000 and 2002, and another $8.1 million to 2,230 investors nationwide. No criminal charges in the case were filed, according to theSt. Petersburg Times.We should note, that despite Scott's suggestion, the scheme wasn't crafted solely for elderly customers. The investments were sold as being safe for anyone, including the elderly, brokers were told to say. The Securities and Exchange Commission did find, however, that more than half of the eventual investors were over 60.Sink said she had nothing to do with the mutual fund scheme. The companies NationsBank and NationsSecurities were managed separately, though NationsBank allowed NationsSecurities representatives to sit in desks at bank lobbies where they would appear to look like bank employees. Sink also says the lawyer who brought the class-action lawsuit would back up her story. We explored that claim in another item, which you can readhere.But in this case, we're drilling down on what Scott said.He said that Sink's tellers were paid kickbacks for directing elderly consumers from ... safe deposits to risky ones. While Sink was state president of NationsBank, bank tellers in Florida were being paid a 5 percent commission for directing bank customers to bank-related stock brokers. The stock brokers were then selling riskier investments under the guise that they were protected either by the bank or the federal government. We rate this claim is True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2838 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Farm owner arrested for protesting Dakota Access Pipeline's theft of her land
Vicki Batts Tags: eminent domain , Dakota Access Pipeline , civil liberties (NaturalNews) There have been countless stories across the web that have documented those struggling to fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline. Native Americans, farmers, ranchers, landowners and environmental activists have joined together to oppose the pipeline and bring the project to a grinding halt.Just recently, 127 Native American activists were arrested at a construction site near the Standing Rock Sioux reservation in North Dakota. Despite the corporate media's attempts to suppress information surrounding the controversial pipeline, concerns about the Dakota Access project have become increasingly visible.However, one issue has remained in the dark: the government's abuse of eminent domain.Eminent domain is what gives the government the right to seize private, law-abiding citizens' properties for public use. Normally this means a road, a school or another public structure that will be used by the citizens of a town or which in some way serves them. However, the government can also seize private land if they can prove that it will provide some sort of "public good." This loophole – and yes, it is a loophole – has allowed our government to steal land from taxpayers for years, and then give it to a private citizen or company. Such is the case with the Dakota Access Pipeline.This pipeline is not a public project; it is being conducted by a private company that will profit off their endeavors. And yet, in spite of all the land that will be destroyed and the people whose lives will be disrupted by this project, the government has still seen fit to steal land and give it to the pipeline's creators under the guise of "public good."In Iowa, a major conflict between farmers and the government has broken out. You see, the state government is trying to take their land, and consequently, their livelihoods, to make way for the pipeline .The state's decision to hand over land owned by farmers to the Dakota Access LLC has been met with quite a lot of opposition – as it should have. Just last week, Calhoun County farmer Cyndy Coppola was arrested on her own property for protesting the government's usurpation of her own land .Apparently, they expected farmers to idly sit back and watch them steal what they worked so hard for.Cyndy Coppola's arrest has been ignored by the mainstream media, probably because it doesn't align with their narrative that Big Government knows best. An injurious move at best, her arrest highlights everything wrong with the way our government is being run.The theft of privately owned land simply cannot be ignored any longer – it is unconstitutional for the government to give a tax-paying citizen's land to a multi-billion dollar energy company so that they can make even more money. And it won't just be the oil and gas companies that profit off this disgusting display of government; dozens of big banks and investment firms will also be taking home a piece of the pie. Food and Water Watch reported in September than 17 financial institutions loaned Dakota Access LLC a whopping $2.5 billion to launch their project. They noted that banks have also given a substantial number of resources to the Energy Transfer Family of companies, such as billion-dollar credit lines and revolving credits. In total, a staggering 38 banks have given this corporation over $10 billion in loans and credits.How many of those banks do you think have ties to our government? Goldman Sachs is on the list, as are several other infamous industry names.If you think the pipeline is being constructed to better our country, you're wrong. It's being constructed to make money for a group of elitist corporations – and they plan on taking down anyone and anything that stands in their way. Sources: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2839 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: As concern rises over the effect of continuous use of headphones and earbuds on hearing, a new paper by federal researchers has found something unexpected. The prevalence of hearing loss in Americans of working age has declined. The paper, published on Thursday in the journal JAMA Otolaryngology — Head Neck Surgery, used data from the National Health and Nutrition Survey, which periodically administers health tests to a representative sample of the population. The investigators, led by Howard J. Hoffman, the director of the epidemiology and statistics program at the National Institute on Deafness and Other Communication Disorders, compared data collected between 1999 and 2004 with data from 2011 and 2012, the most recent available. Hearing loss in this study meant that a person could not hear, in at least one ear, a sound about as loud as rustling leaves. The researchers reported that while 15. 9 percent of the population studied in the earlier period had problems hearing, just 14. 1 percent of the more recent group had hearing loss. The good news is part of a continuing trend — Americans’ hearing has gotten steadily better since 1959. Most surprising to Mr. Hoffman, a statistician, was that even though the total population of to grew by 20 million over the time period studied — and the greatest growth was in the oldest people, a group most likely to have hearing problems — the total number of people with hearing loss fell, from 28 million to 27. 7 million. Hearing experts who were not associated with the study said they were utterly convinced by the results. “It’s a fantastic paper,†said Brian Fligor, an audiologist with Lantos Technologies of Wakefield, Mass. which develops custom earpieces to protect ears from noise. “I totally believe them. †“Initially, I was surprised,†said Dr. Debara Tucci, a professor of otolaryngology at Duke. “But then I thought about all the reasons why hearing loss might be declining. †It is a long list including the closing of noisy factories, reduced use of medications like some antibiotics that can cause hearing loss, immunizations to prevent childhood illnesses like measles that can affect hearing, and better health in general in the population. In her region, Dr. Tucci said, many patients used to work in noisy textile factories, most of which are now closed. “I used to see a huge amount of hearing loss,†she said. “I don’t see that so much anymore. †Mr. Hoffman said — and others agreed — that although years of exposure to very loud noise can damage hearing, concerns that loud music being played through headphones is diminishing the hearing of a generation are as yet unproven. If there were a headphone connection, it might have shown up as an increase in hearing loss among people in their 20s, because the issue of people wearing headphones for extended periods of time has been around for more than decade. But people in their 20s had no more hearing loss than people that age a decade ago. “We are going to keep studying this,†Mr. Hoffman said. The study found that men — at all ages — were more likely to have hearing problems than women, and that the greatest risk factor for hearing loss was age. While the new data is gratifying, Mr. Hoffman cautioned that hearing loss remains a problem. “This doesn’t mean we have prevented hearing loss,†he stressed. “It just means it is delayed. †Still, other researchers said the declining prevalence of hearing loss was part of a broad health trend internationally, with almost every major disease and disability on the wane and occurring later in life. The hearing loss data, said James Vaupel, director, Max Planck Institute for Demographic Research in Rostock, Germany, “is consistent with other research showing a delay in aging. †“The evidence suggests that 70 is the new 60,†Dr. Vaupel said, “with health and mortality of today being similar to the health and mortality trends of half a century ago. †| 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2840 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: While appearing for the first time on the campaign trail with Hillary Clinton in North Carolina, President Obama stood by her side and brought down the house with a resounding endorsement of the presumptive Democratic nominee for president. However, before he spoke, Clinton took to the podium first and delivered yet another speech that showed us that she is more than ready to be the next President of the United States.There was a moment during Clinton s speech, however, that was absolutely pure comedy gold, and a brilliant jab at the presumptive Republican nominee, Donald Trump.You may recall, and if you don t, you should, Trump was one of the lead birthers who made the ridiculous claim President Obama wasn t born in the United States.So, while speaking about the president on stage today, Clinton told everyone that she s honored to stay with President Obama, and knows that he s a person who has never forgotten where he came from. She then looks directly into the camera and says: And Donald, if you re out there tweeting, it s Hawaii. Haaa! Mic drop. Amazing, simply amazing.However, it can t be lost on us that she made a very real point of reminding us all that Trump once demanded to see the president s birth certificate, so clearly him being racist is not anything new.Watch the hilarious jab from Hillary here:Clinton: Obama has never forgotten where he came from, and Donald, if you re out there tweeting, it s Hawaii https://t.co/QBdR5mBnle CNN Politics (@CNNPolitics) July 5, 2016Featured image via video screen capture | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2841 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A strong 6.5 magnitude quake struck the Pacific coast of Costa Rica near its capital city San Jose on Sunday night, but there were no initial reports of injuries or significant damage to infrastructure. Costa Rican President Luis Guillermo Solis said authorities were gathering information and asked residents to remain calm and to be prepared for any possible aftershocks. A Reuters witness said the quake was felt very briefly in San Jose, but it was enough to startle residents. We re very scared. It s been years since we felt such a strong one, said Otto Vargas, a university professor in San Jose, who was home with his family when the shaking started. The quake hit in a rural area near the popular beach tourism city of Jaco, where there are few tall buildings. It did not trigger a tsunami threat in the Pacific. Firefighters in Jaco said there were no reports of victims or major damage, but said there were some electrical poles that had come loose and fallen. Social media showed images of supermarkets in Jaco with merchandise strewn across the aisles. The Costa Rican Red Cross said it had no reports of casualties. Neighboring El Salvador s civil protection agency tweeted that the quake caused some electrical posts to fall, while the civil protection agency in neighboring Panama said there were no reports of damage there. The quake, initially measured as much as 6.8 magnitude, was centered 43 miles (69 km) southwest of San Jose at a depth of 12.3 miles (20 km), the U.S. Geological Survey said. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2842 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Because only a Right Wing Nut believes if you re paying a fortune to attend college, you should get an actual education The guiding principle of the University of Wisconsin is the Wisconsin Idea, a concept first outlined in 1904 by then-UW President Charles Van Hise who declared, I shall never be content until the beneficent influence of the University reaches every home in the state. With the rise of the Progressive Movement, which pioneered populist and socialist reforms, the UW came to view the Wisconsin Idea as a mandate to use its research powers to influence and direct government policy.Today, the university proclaims: The Wisconsin Idea is the principle that the university should improve people s lives beyond the classroom. It spans UW Madison s teaching, research, outreach and public service. With higher education costs skyrocketing and student loan debt hanging over graduates for decades after college, Media Trackers is launching a weekly feature that looks at individual University of Wisconsin professors and measures their area of research, and the classes they teach, against the standard of the Wisconsin Idea.Prof. Karma R. Chavez is an associate professor at UW-Madison s Department of Communication Arts. According to a UW employee salary database maintained by the Wisconsin State Journal, Chavez made $87,224 during the 2014-2015 fiscal year, and has achieved tenure at the school.Chavez teaches seven different courses, ranging from Queer Theory (CA 969) to Queer Migrations (CA 610) and Rhetoric and Queer Theory (also CA 610).Chavez takes pride in her work co-founding of the Queer Migration Research Network, and the UW s Comparative US Studies (CUSS) group. I work with various grassroots social justice organizations and collectives, claims on her official UW biography.The Queer Migration Research Network describes what it does as, Queer migration scholarship critically explores how sexual and gender normativities shape, regulate, and contest contemporary international migration processes that stem from histories of colonialism, global capitalism, genocide, slavery, and racialized patriarchy. In a 2012 essay, Chavez argued that academics and the media should work together to eliminate references to border security when discussing the southern border in the context of the immigration debate, and instead talk about border militarization. Chavez claims in her piece that, President Reagan s administration was most responsible for rolling out the immense infrastructure that would lead to the most drastic border militarization. She further claimed that border security efforts use military tactics to control targeted populations along the border.According to Chavez, the consequence of border security efforts to date has led to the rape of women, including rape perpetrated by U.S. border officials. She cites no proof of this shocking assertion, writing only that, many migrant women have reported being raped under the conditions of militarization for reasons that would not exist if not for militarization. Put another way, Chavez claims that if the U.S. abolishes all border security efforts, women seeking to cross the border will no longer be raped by U.S. border officials or those who ply in the smuggling of humans across the border.A weekly radio host on WORT, Chavez recently hosted shows that criticized Israel s efforts to defend itself from the terrorist group Hamas and examined the cultural history of American nudism. Nowhere on her website does Chavez try to connect the study of queer migration to the Wisconsin Idea of improve[ing] people s lives beyond the classroom. Via: EAG News | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2843 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Was there a Federal study that was banned that suggested refugees generate more government income than they require in expenses? Claim summaries: A U.S. Department of Health and Human Services study compared the tax revenues generated by refugees to the overall cost of resettlement.
contextual information: One of the arguments made by the Trump administration for lowering the cap on the number of refugees allowed into the United States is that the costs of refugee resettlement outweigh its benefits. lowering Estimates vary on the total annual cost of processing and resettling refugees in the U.S., but a rough breakdown by the National Conference of State Legislatures put the total expenditures for accepting approximately 70,000 refugees in 2014 at $582 million.These cost estimates rarely attempt to take into account any economic benefits refugees might provide to the countries that take them in. According to a Facebook meme making the rounds since mid-2018, just such an analysis was undertaken by the Trump administration, but the results were suppressed because they undercut the official position:A recently leaked federal study found that refugees to America brought in $63 billion in government revenues than they cost in the last 10 years. Trump chief policy adviser Stephen Miller banned the release of the study, because it contradicts his claim that refugees are too costly. Pass it on!A leaked document fitting that description was indeed published by the New York Times in September 2017. It was an early draft of a report by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing, at the president's request, the estimated long-term costs of the United States Refugee Admissions Program. The Times noted that:The internal study, which was completed in late July but never publicly released, found that refugees contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government between 2005 and 2014 through the payment of federal, state and local taxes. Overall, this report estimated that the net fiscal impact of refugees was positive over the 10-year period, at $63 billion.All in all, the report said, the net fiscal impact of refugees over the 10-year period was positive, not negative, to the tune of $63 billion at all levels of government:The study concluded that refugees on average had a net fiscal impact "comparable" to that of the general population:The per capita annual net fiscal benefit was $2,205 for refugees and $1,848 for the general U.S. population, a difference not likely to be significant given margins of error and other limitations of this study. Expenditures for the general U.S. population were on average higher than expenditures for refugees, while revenues were more comparable.However, none of this information was contained in the final report delivered to the President, the Times reported, noting that some of the refugee program's proponents believed the results of the study were "suppressed" internally. Administration officials characterized those results as illegitimate:This leak was delivered by someone with an ideological agenda, not someone looking at hard data, said Raj Shah, a White House spokesman. The actual report pursuant to the presidential memorandum shows that refugees with few skills coming from war-torn countries take more government benefits from the Department of Health and Human Services than the average population, and are not a net benefit to the U.S. economy.John Graham, the acting assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at the health department, said: We do not comment on allegedly leaked documents and that no report had been finalized. He noted that Mr. Trumps memorandum seeks an analysis related to the cost of refugee programs. Therefore, the only analysis in the scope of H.H.S.s response to the memo would be on refugee-related expenditures from data within H.H.S. programs.The three-page report the agency ultimately submitted, dated Sept. 5, does just that, using government data to compare the costs of refugees to Americans and making no mention of revenues contributed by refugees.The Times also said that according to White House sources, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, who is reputed to be the chief architect of the administration's immigration policies, "personally intervened" to ensure that only the costs of admitting refugees, and not the fiscal benefits thereof, were enumerated in the final report. (According to the New Yorker, the White House denied that Miller was involved in producing the report.)The Facebook meme is largely accurate, then, although it somewhat mischaracterizes what became of the original draft report. It wasn't "banned" from release, in that it doesn't appear the report was ever intended to be made public. It was allegedly suppressed, however, in that it never reached President Trump's desk, and all discussion of the fiscal benefits of admitting refugees into the United States was excised from the final document. Estimates vary on the total annual cost of processing and resettling refugees in the U.S., but a rough breakdown by the National Conference of State Legislatures put the total expenditures for accepting approximately 70,000 refugees in 2014 at $582 million. breakdown These cost estimates rarely attempt to take into account any economic benefits refugees might provide to the countries that take them in. According to a Facebook meme making the rounds since mid-2018, just such an analysis was undertaken by the Trump administration, but the results were suppressed because they undercut the official position: A recently leaked federal study found that refugees to America brought in $63 billion in government revenues than they cost in the last 10 years. Trump chief policy adviser Stephen Miller banned the release of the study, because it contradicts his claim that refugees are too costly. Pass it on! A leaked document fitting that description was indeed published by the New York Times in September 2017. It was an early draft of a report by the Department of Health and Human Services (HHS) detailing, at the president's request, the estimated long-term costs of the United States Refugee Admissions Program. The Times noted that: document The internal study, which was completed in late July but never publicly released, found that refugees contributed an estimated $269.1 billion in revenues to all levels of government between 2005 and 2014 through the payment of federal, state and local taxes. Overall, this report estimated that the net fiscal impact of refugees was positive over the 10-year period, at $63 billion. All in all, the report said, the net fiscal impact of refugees over the 10-year period was positive, not negative, to the tune of $63 billion at all levels of government: The study concluded that refugees on average had a net fiscal impact "comparable" to that of the general population: The per capita annual net fiscal benefit was $2,205 for refugees and $1,848 for the general U.S. population, a difference not likely to be significant given margins of error and other limitations of this study. Expenditures for the general U.S. population were on average higher than expenditures for refugees, while revenues were more comparable. However, none of this information was contained in the final report delivered to the President, the Times reported, noting that some of the refugee program's proponents believed the results of the study were "suppressed" internally. Administration officials characterized those results as illegitimate: This leak was delivered by someone with an ideological agenda, not someone looking at hard data, said Raj Shah, a White House spokesman. The actual report pursuant to the presidential memorandum shows that refugees with few skills coming from war-torn countries take more government benefits from the Department of Health and Human Services than the average population, and are not a net benefit to the U.S. economy. John Graham, the acting assistant secretary for planning and evaluation at the health department, said: We do not comment on allegedly leaked documents and that no report had been finalized. He noted that Mr. Trumps memorandum seeks an analysis related to the cost of refugee programs. Therefore, the only analysis in the scope of H.H.S.s response to the memo would be on refugee-related expenditures from data within H.H.S. programs. The three-page report the agency ultimately submitted, dated Sept. 5, does just that, using government data to compare the costs of refugees to Americans and making no mention of revenues contributed by refugees. The Times also said that according to White House sources, Trump adviser Stephen Miller, who is reputed to be the chief architect of the administration's immigration policies, "personally intervened" to ensure that only the costs of admitting refugees, and not the fiscal benefits thereof, were enumerated in the final report. (According to the New Yorker, the White House denied that Miller was involved in producing the report.) denied The Facebook meme is largely accurate, then, although it somewhat mischaracterizes what became of the original draft report. It wasn't "banned" from release, in that it doesn't appear the report was ever intended to be made public. It was allegedly suppressed, however, in that it never reached President Trump's desk, and all discussion of the fiscal benefits of admitting refugees into the United States was excised from the final document. Blitzer, Jonathan. "How Stephen Miller Single-Handedly Got the U.S. to Accept Fewer Refugees."
The New Yorker. 13 October 2017. Davis, Julie Hirschfeld. "Trump to Cap Refugees Allowed into U.S. at 30,000, a Record Low."
The New York Times. 17 September 2018. Davis, Julie Hirschfeld and Somini Sengupta. "Trump Administration Rejects Study Showing Positive Impact of Refugees."
The New York Times. 18 September 2017. Phillips, Amber. "Here's How Much the United States Spends on Refugees."
The Washington Post. 20 November 2015. The New York Times. "Rejected Report Shows Revenue Brought in by Refugees."
19 September 2017. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2844 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Will banks be required to disclose all transactions exceeding $600 to the IRS as part of the Biden administration's proposal? Claim summaries: The American Families Plan has a reporting requirement for banks that has infuriated some.
contextual information: Announced in April 2021, U.S. President Joe Biden's American Families Plan is an ambitious proposal that aims to expand Americans' access to childcare and education and increase the number of women in the workforce. The plan intends to fund all of this through higher taxes on income earners and increased reporting requirements for banks that could potentially yield more tax revenue. These reporting requirements have drawn the ire of several banks that took issue with this less widely known section of the plan. A Facebook post by FNB Community Bank claimed: "The Biden administration has proposed requiring all community banks and other financial institutions to report to the IRS on all deposits and withdrawals through business and personal accounts worth more than $600, regardless of tax liability. This indiscriminate, comprehensive bank account reporting to the Internal Revenue Service (IRS) could soon be enacted in Congress and will create an unacceptable invasion of privacy for our customers." Another screenshot shared by our readers expressed similar concerns: "The Independent Community Bankers of America (ICBA) even began a campaign, calling on communities to send a letter to Biden to prevent this so-called intrusive proposal: 'Tell Congress: Don't Let IRS Invade My Privacy.' The Biden administration is proposing requiring financial institutions to report to the IRS all transactions of all business and personal accounts worth more than $600. This is an unprecedented invasion of privacy. In order to oppose this intrusive proposal, please send this letter to your representative and senators immediately." We looked up the proposal itself, and it does require more robust reporting of transactions across business and personal accounts. The proposal, which aims to go into effect after December 31, 2022, states: "This proposal would create a comprehensive financial account information reporting regime. Financial institutions would report data on financial accounts in an information return. The annual return will report gross inflows and outflows with a breakdown for physical cash, transactions with a foreign account, and transfers to and from another account with the same owner." This requirement would apply to all business and personal accounts from financial institutions, including bank, loan, and investment accounts, with the exception of accounts below a low de minimis gross flow threshold of $600 or fair market value of $600. We begin by explaining some of the more technical terms in this proposal. A "de minimis threshold" is broadly defined as the amount of a transaction that has such a small value that accounting for it would be unreasonable. We spoke to Visiting Assistant Professor of Tax Law at New York University, Nyamagaga Gondwe, who explained, "It is the amount below which the IRS would argue isn't worth investigating. It's the difference between your company giving you a $5 card to Subway versus traveling on a private jet on your company's dime. The latter is worth reporting." In this case, "gross flow" refers to the aggregate inflows and outflows of cash from bank accounts. In sum, the current proposal stipulates that an aggregate amount of less than $600 worth of cash flowing into and out of accounts is not worth reporting. The "fair market value" refers to the amount people are willing to pay for an asset in the open market. In this case, Gondwe argued, the use of the term could possibly refer to the changing market value of transactions more than $600 that may occur in foreign currency transactions. The ICBA claims that the proposal will make banks report "all transactions" above the limit, but this is misleading. While it is true that the IRS will have more information on cash flows above $600, that doesn't mean they will have all the information pertaining to all transactions. The Center for American Progress (CAP) points out that banks will only be providing aggregate numbers to the IRS after each year—gross inflow and gross outflow—and not individualized transaction information. This reporting requirement would also extend to peer-to-peer payment services like Venmo, but wouldn't require people to report any additional information to the government. According to The Wall Street Journal, financial institutions must already report interest, dividends, and investment incomes to the IRS, and the IRS can obtain other information through audits. According to Marie Sapirie of Tax Notes, a publication focused on tax news, a parenthetical to the proposal indicates that there is some flexibility in raising the minimum account balance/inflow/outflow above $600. The Tax Notes report also states that the Treasury Department estimated this form of reporting would raise $463 billion over the 10-year budget window, making it the third-largest revenue raiser proposed in the budget. The aim is to target businesses outside of large corporations that carry out gross underreporting of their income in the amount of $166 billion per year. According to the proposal: "Requiring comprehensive information reporting on the inflows and outflows of financial accounts will increase the visibility of gross receipts and deductible expenses to the IRS. Increased visibility of business income will enhance the effectiveness of IRS enforcement measures and encourage voluntary compliance." Banks claim this would be an invasion of consumer privacy, with the ICBA saying it would allow the government to monitor account information. However, CAP analysts Seth Hanlon and Galen Hendricks argue, "Only the prior year's total inflow and total outflow would be reported on annual forms. No one would say that the IRS monitors you on your job because it receives a W-2 from your employer with your total wages every January." Another challenge not mentioned in the ICBA's consumer alert is the higher costs this reporting proposal may impose on banks. In May 2021, a coalition of banking associations wrote a letter to the U.S. Senate Committee on Finance, arguing that they already provide a lot of data to the IRS, and that this would impose additional costs on their systems. The costs and other burdens imposed to collect and report account flow information would surpass the potential benefits from such a reporting scheme. New reporting would appear to require material development costs and process additions for financial institutions, as well as significant reconciliation and compliance burdens on impacted taxpayers. For example, reporting total gross receipts and disbursements would require a new reporting paradigm for depository institutions, which necessitates system changes to collect the information. On the flipside, Sapirie wrote for Tax Notes, the benefits of such a reporting proposal may be difficult to realize: "Increasing the amount of information flowing into the IRS would not in itself lead to increased enforcement, and it might come with added challenges." Former IRS Commissioner Charles O. Rossotti acknowledged that the IRS today cannot use all the information it already receives, and significant areas of noncompliance are barely addressed, so more reporting alone will not solve the problem. It would almost certainly have a deterrent effect for taxpayers contemplating evasion, but the extent of that effect is unclear, and it might be insufficient to justify the costs to financial institutions and the federal government of implementing such a large new reporting regime. But CAP's analysis argues that this will help prevent tax evasion while also providing more funding to enhance data security for consumers: "Additional funding would go to enhancing data security. Even at present, the IRS's data security is already much better than the financial industry, with only very rare and limited breaches compared to the exponentially larger data breaches from financial institutions. Second, the reporting of information flows only from financial institutions to the IRS and not in the other direction, as some earlier proposals had called for." The Biden administration's bank reporting proposal is a critical element of the Build Back Better agenda. It gives the IRS some visibility into opaque forms of income that disproportionately accrue to high-income individuals. Despite fearmongering from bank lobbies, the proposal protects taxpayers' privacy while simply requiring banks to provide basic, aggregated information about flows. That enables the IRS to select audits in a more efficient and equitable way so that the vast majority of taxpayers will be less likely to be audited. And by deterring and helping catch tax cheats, the proposal raises substantial revenue for the Build Back Better agenda, which provides critical investments to increase economic opportunities for American families and communities. On October 12, 2021, Speaker Nancy Pelosi defended the proposal in response to a question from a reporter, who said, "[Banks] are concerned about the tracking of transactions that are greater than $600; Americans are starting to get worried about this. Do you think [this] is going to stay in the Reconciliation Bill?" "With all due respect, the plural of anecdote is not data," Pelosi said. "Yes, there are concerns that some people have. But if people are breaking the law and not paying their taxes, one way to track them is through the banking measure. I think $600—that's a negotiation that will go on as to what the amount is. But yes." Whatever the impact of this proposal is, it does require additional reporting of certain bank transactions, just not in the way the banks are portraying it. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2845 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did Kamala Harris Bail Out 'Violent Rioters' During George Floyd Protests? Claim summaries: The claim appeared to stem from a June 2020 tweet from Harris.
contextual information: On Aug. 11, 2020, then-U.S. presidential candidate Joe Biden selected California U.S. Sen. Kamala Harris as his Democratic running mate in the race against Republican incumbents Donald Trump and Mike Pence. Joe Biden Kamala Harris Donald Trump Mike Pence Following that announcement, Trump and his supporters attempted to call attention to what they framed as immoral judgment by Harris the Trump campaign alleged she wrongly encouraged Americans to help people who were arrested during protests over the police in-custody death of George Floyd in Minneapolis. George Floyd For example, in an Aug. 17 speech to supporters in Mankato, Minnesota (which is about 80 miles southwest of Minneapolis), Trump said, according to a Factba.se transcription of the event: Factba.se transcription Kamala Harris encouraged Americans to donate to the so-called Minnesota Freedom Fund do you know that is? which bailed out the rioters, looters, assaulters, and anarchists from jail. And Biden's staff did the same thing; they donated a lot of their money to get them out of jail so that everyone was right back on the streets. Think of that: This is what is running for office. Less than two weeks later, U.S. Sen. Tom Cotton, a Republican from Arkansas, doubled down on the president's claim, alleging in a tweet: "Kamala Harris helped violent rioters in Minnesota get out of jail to do more damage." Sen. Tom Cotton tweet Around the same time, at least one conservative website purported in a headline that Harris donated to the Minnesota Freedom Fund (MFF), which indeed gives cash to people who cannot afford bail so they don't have to wait in jail until court hearings, or agree to high-interest loans. one conservative website Over the course of months, numerous Snopes readers contacted us to investigate whether Harris had actually given money to the Minnesota-based organization, and, if so, whether those contributions allowed for any of the roughly 170 people who were arrested during protests to get out of jail and commit more crimes. First, let us identify what appeared to be the basis of those assertions. Following Floyd's death, supporters of the civil rights movement nationwide (including many celebrities) donated more than $30 million to MFF, according to the nonprofit and news reports. High-profile donors used social media to promote their contributions, and Harris, on June 1, used her official accounts as a vice presidential candidate to express her support for the fundraising effort. including many celebrities more than $30 million accounts "If you're able to, chip in now to the @MNFreedomFund to help post bail for those protesting on the ground in Minnesota," she wrote on Facebook and Twitter, including links to an MFF donation page on the left-leaning fundraising site, ActBlue. @MNFreedomFund In other words, while it was true Harris publicly expressed support for the nonprofit and encouraged others to donate to it in summer 2020, she did not say on social media or via any other public statement that she herself donated money to the organization. Next, we analyzed how Harris' 2020 campaign spent money and if, or to what extent, it helped the nonprofit, despite the fact she had not publicly declared the possible financial tie in a speech, interview, or on social media. Based on campaign filings compiled by the Federal Election Commission (FEC) and Center for Responsive Politics, no expenditure receipt listed "Minnesota Freedom Fund" debunking the possible claim that she used campaign money to help the nonprofit. Federal Election Commission Center for Responsive Politics Snopes reached out to MFF, asking if Harris at any point donated money and, if so, for the contribution's details. Greg Lewin, the organization's interim executive director, responded to us via email: "No, we have nothing in our records indicating a donation from Vice President Harris." We also reached out to Harris' press secretary, Symone Sanders, to comment on critics' accusations, but we have not heard back. We will update this report when or if we do. (As part of a wide-sweeping proposal to reform the country's criminal justice system, the Biden-Harris administration has pledged to eliminate the country's cash-bail system.) has pledged Now, let us move to the latter claim regarding the people who MFF helped during the protests, in light of Harris' June 1 posts praising the organization's work. Established in 2016, MFF is among the many nonprofits that attempt to counteract inequities in the country's cash-bail system by paying detainees' criminal and immigration bonds. Then, when those people attend court proceedings to determine the outcome of their case or whether they indeed broke the law prior to their arrest they must return the full value of the cash bail to the Minnesota-based nonprofit. The MFF website states: inequities states Weve never made decisions based simply on pretrial charge and we wont now. [...] We have always prioritized those who are unable to pay for freedom and face the greatest level of danger and marginalization. We will continue to center and prioritize the following groups in our bail payment: BIPOC (Black, Indigenous and People of Color) Those experiencing homelessness People arrested who live in Minnesota Those who have been detained while fighting for justice Nearly half the people we pay bail for have had their case completely dismissed, suggesting there was never a case for the arrest or charge to begin with. Therefore, if a judge has decided that someone can be released so long as they can afford the price, we will pay that fee if we can afford it. Like in dozens of U.S. cities where people protested Floyds death, peaceful marches during the day between May 26 and early June set the stage for vandalism and destruction at night. However, the overwhelming majority of people who were arrested during the large gatherings whether chaotic or peaceful did not need the MFF's help. Citing accounting by the American Bail Coalition (a trade group of insurance companies who profit from underwriting bail bonds) and Hennepin County jail records, The Washington Post reported in September that all but three of the 170 people arrested during the protests were released from jail within a week. Of the 167 released, only 10 had to put up a monetary bond to be released, and, in most cases, the amounts were nominal, such as $78 or $100. In fact, 92 percent of those arrested did not have to pay bail and 29 percent of those arrested did not face charges, the news outlet reported. American Bail Coalition The Washington Post "We have paid all the protest bails that have come our way," the MFF website said. "[Many] of the people who were arrested during the uprising werent detained and instead were given citations then released, have been released with no bail, or held with no bail." said However, among the small group of people who did receive direct bail assistance from the nonprofit, one man was arrested on suspicion of shooting at police with an AK-47-style mini Draco pistol in the early hours of May 30, as well as a woman who allegedly stole from a cell phone store in a Minneapolis suburb and other businesses the day prior, according to The Washington Post and other news reports. As of September, the nonprofit paid $75,000 in cash to help the former suspect and $750 to assist the latter. AK-47-style mini Draco pistol woman The Washington Post news reports Additionally, a 32-year-old man whom MFF bailed out on an assault charge in July a case that was unrelated to the protests was charged with committing third-degree assault the following month, leaving the victim with a traumatic brain injury and a fractured skull, according to news reports. Lewin said in a statement afterward that the organization needs to "strengthen our internal procedures" to ensure its clients stay out of the criminal justice system after their first go-around. news reports statement In sum, while Harris indeed expressed public support for MFF following Floyd's death, it was false to claim she donated money to the organization, or that it helped protesters "get out of jail and do more damage," like Cotton alleged. Rather, no evidence existed to show the handful of people who received direct bail assistance for arrests related to the demonstrations committed more crimes after their initial detainment. For those reasons, we rate this claim "false." | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2846 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Student loan debt has risen by 170 percent since 2006 and currently surpasses $1.5 trillion, positioning it as the second highest debt category after mortgages and exceeding credit card debt.
contextual information: In her book, The Truths We Hold, California Sen. Kamala Harris asks, "How can you dream when you are drowning in student loan debt?" in a section on the rising cost of living in America. On the campaign trail, the Democratic presidential hopeful has called student loan debt one of the biggest challenges facing our country and our students. In the Senate, she helped reintroduce the Debt-Free College Act, a bill she says will help reverse the growing student debt crisis. Specifically, it would provide states with incentives through matching grants to increase investments in public higher education. The senator then made this eye-popping claim about how fast student loan debt has grown in a news release on March 6 announcing her support for the bill: "College debt has increased 170 percent since 2006 and now exceeds $1.5 trillion, which is second only to mortgage debt and surpasses even credit card debt." She tweeted a similar claim a few days later. But is student loan debt really growing that fast? And is it really second only to mortgage debt? We decided to crunch Harris's numbers in this fact check. To support the statement, a spokesman for Harris cited a Federal Reserve table showing the nation's cumulative student loan debt for each year from 2006 through 2018. He also cited articles from The Washington Post and MarketWatch. The Federal Reserve table shows that student loan debt at the end of 2006 was $521 billion. By the end of 2018, the most recent period available, it had grown to $1.57 trillion, which matches Harris's claim that it now exceeds $1.5 trillion. However, after calculating the numbers, we found an increase of 201 percent, an even faster rate than the 170 percent Harris referenced. "I'd say that her statement is mostly correct," said Mark Kantrowitz, a national financial aid expert. "The one slight error: She actually underestimates the growth of student loan debt outstanding." Kantrowitz is the publisher and vice president of research for SavingforCollege.com, a guide to college savings plans. "The only way I get to 170 percent," he added, "is if I compare the current debt outstanding to 2007 instead of 2006. That works out to be 170 percent." Hans Johnson, director of the Public Policy Institute of California's Higher Education Center, also reviewed the data and found a 200 percent increase based on the most current Federal Reserve figures. Why is college debt growing so fast? More students going to college accounts for some of the growth of student loan debt, but only a small portion, Kantrowitz said. In 2006, there were 15.2 million college students. A decade later, that number had increased by 11 percent to 16.9 million, he said, citing figures from the National Center for Education Statistics. Kantrowitz added that another factor is that federal grants have slowed as tuition has gone up. States often cut tuition assistance at the first signs of a financial crisis. The average student loan debt was nearly $30,000 for students graduating with a bachelor's degree in 2018, Kantrowitz said. That is up from nearly $21,000 in 2006. We found this part of Harris's statement to be accurate. In 2014, PolitiFact Virginia reported that student debt began to outpace credit card debt in the second quarter of 2010, citing data from the Federal Reserve Bank of New York. At the end of 2018, the nation's overall credit card debt was $870 billion, and mortgage balances stood at $9.1 trillion, according to the data. Our rating: Sen. Kamala Harris said, "College debt has increased 170 percent since 2006 and now exceeds $1.5 trillion, which is second only to mortgage debt and surpasses even credit card debt." She actually understated how fast student loan debt is growing. The most recent Federal Reserve figures show it has increased by 201 percent since 2006. Harris was right about college debt topping $1.5 trillion and being second only to mortgage debt. We rate her overall statement Mostly True. MOSTLY TRUE: The statement is accurate but needs clarification or additional information. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2847 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did a State Democratic Party Logo Once Feature the Slogan 'White Supremacy'? Claim summaries: Until 1966, the official logo of the Alabama Democratic Party featured a crowing rooster and a banner reading "White Supremacy."
contextual information: Amid the political controversy engendered by the protests of National Football League athletes who refused to stand during pre-game renditions of the national anthem in late September 2017 to display solidarity with Black victims of police violence—a gesture supported by many Democrats but condemned by President Trump and conservative Republicans—a meme was circulated via social media making the point that the Democratic Party was not always a standard bearer for racial equality. This is an example from Twitter: the centerpiece of the post is a reproduction of an illustration typically captioned "Democratic Party Logo until 1966," featuring a drawing of a crowing rooster and the slogan "White Supremacy, For the Right." Although the description is somewhat misleading ("White Supremacy" was never a slogan of the national Democratic Party, for example, nor have we seen evidence that the image was "purged from the Internet"), this was, in fact, the emblem of the Alabama Democratic Party between 1904 and 1966.
First, regarding the rooster, it's often mistakenly assumed that the donkey was always the symbol of the Democratic Party, when in fact the party began using a crowing rooster as its mascot around 1840. This version of how that came to pass is from a biographical sketch of Indianapolis lawyer and Whig politician Thomas D. Walpole published in 1876: "In 1840 [Tom Walpole] was an ardent and enthusiastic Whig, and rendered great service to the Whig party, and contributed largely to the success of General Harrison. It was during this canvass that Tom gave to the Democratic party their emblem, which they have claimed ever since, the chicken cock, or rooster." George Patterson, then editing the Democratic paper, wrote just before the August election of that year to Joseph Chapman of Greenfield that the Democratic party would be beaten, and that there was no hope; but, said he, "Crow, Chapman, crow." By some means, Tom got possession of the letter and exposed it. A year or two subsequent to this circumstance, Messrs. George and Page Chapman became proprietors and editors of the Democratic paper and placed a rooster at the head of their paper. From this circumstance, it was generally supposed that they were the persons to whom the letter was addressed and the original crowers; but such is not the case. It is to Tom Walpole that the Democratic party is indebted for the emblem of the rooster.
Other sources grant full credit to Joseph Chapman for dreaming up the rooster symbol, but in any case, although it was never officially adopted as the emblem of the national Democratic Party, it very quickly became an unofficial one and remained so until cartoonist Thomas Nast's depictions of Republicans as elephants and Democrats as donkeys captured the public imagination in the late nineteenth century (to date, the national Democratic Party has never officially adopted any animal as its symbol). The forerunner of today's Democratic Party was born during the 1820s and '30s, coalescing around the populist presidential candidacy of national war hero and southern slaveholder Andrew Jackson. Although egalitarianism and freedom of the individual were much-touted ideals of "Jacksonian Democracy," in reality, the Democratic Party of the time took white supremacy for granted and had little to no interest in defending the freedom and equality of African Americans, Native Americans, or any other racial minorities. Still, the party was conflicted over the expansion of slavery and split in two during the 1860 elections, with the Northern Democrats opposing expansion and Southern Democrats favoring it.
The Democratic Party remained dominant in the South after the Civil War, opposing Reconstruction and enacting laws to suppress Black voters and enforce racial segregation. The Alabama Democratic Party went further than most, calling for the adoption of a new state constitution in 1901 that explicitly disenfranchised Black voters and celebrating its success in that effort by officially embracing the slogan "White Supremacy" three years later. The Monroe Journal of Claiborne, Alabama reported on June 2, 1904: "The state executive committee adopted the game cock as the Democratic Party emblem. Above the bird will be the words 'White Supremacy' and below 'For the Right.'" To be sure, there were a few Alabama Democrats who objected to the emblem after its adoption, though not for the reasons you might suppose. For example, Democratic Congressman J. Thomas Heflin was perfectly fine with the racist slogan but felt the image of the rooster was undignified: "I think that the emblem is not what it should be, and that it fails to impress the people with the dignity of the Democratic Party. To my mind, it would have been much better to have had, instead of the rooster, the picture of a handsome young woman holding the Constitution in a scroll aloft, with the words 'Here We Rest' prominently shown upon it. I see no objection to the use of the two expressions already adopted, but do not think that the design is worthy of a great party like ours."
Dignified or not, that emblem would appear at the top of every Alabama state ballot for many decades to come, as noted, for example, in this November 1940 report by the Chicago Tribune: "In Alabama, the disfranchisement of the Negro is proclaimed proudly by the Democratic party on the official ballot in all elections. At the head of the Democratic column on the ballot appears the emblem of the rooster. Arched over the rooster's head are the words: 'White Supremacy.' Below the rooster appear the words: 'For the Right.'" By the early 1950s, however, the Alabama Democratic Party's proud embrace of white supremacy was becoming a liability for the national party. In 1952, New York Gov. Thomas Dewey, a Republican campaigning on behalf of Dwight D. Eisenhower, gave a speech laying the racist logo at the doorstep of Eisenhower's Democratic rival Adlai Stevenson (from the Dixon Evening Telegraph, October 9, 1952): "Gov. Thomas E. Dewey says the 'White Supremacy' slogan on Alabama's Democratic ballot convicts that party's top nominees of 'rankest hypocrisy.' In a state-wide radio and television address Wednesday night, the New York governor ripped into Gov. Adlai E. Stevenson and Sen. John J. Sparkman of Alabama after holding up to TV viewers the official Alabama ballot showing: A rooster emblem, with the words 'White Supremacy' above it and the words 'For the Right' below it. 'There it is,' Dewey said, 'the rooster and the banner of White supremacy, Ku Klux Klan, Jim Crow banner flying over the election for Stevenson and Sparkman in this year 1952.'"
Though the Democrats lost that election, the emblem would remain intact on the ballot for another 14 years, until leaders of the Alabama Democratic Party finally modified the slogan in 1966 for purely pragmatic reasons: the party needed "Negro" voters. The Montgomery Advertiser reported: "In an unexpected display of strength, the Loyalist faction of the State Democratic Executive Committee removed the 'white supremacy' label from the party emblem Saturday in a move admittedly designed to keep Negro voters in the fold... The only change made in the emblem was removing the words 'white supremacy' and substituting 'Democrats.' The rooster was untouched." Charles W. McKay of Talladega offered the resolution changing the emblem. McKay gained fame a number of years ago when he authored the "Nullification Resolution" in the Legislature, which sought to declare null and void the Supreme Court's school desegregation decision. McKay made it clear that the emblem change was necessary if the Democrats were to attract Negro votes this year. "We can't afford to spend a lot of money nominating candidates this spring and then take a stick and run off 150,000 to 175,000 voters who might vote Democratic," he declared. Ironically (though the irony may well have been lost on McKay), it was only because the voter suppression measures instituted decades earlier by his own state party had been knocked down by the Voting Rights Act of 1965 that many of those potential new Black voters would even have access to the polls. As to the Alabama Democratic Party rooster, it, too, was finally sent into forced retirement, but not until 1996 (30 years later), when it was replaced with the image of a donkey. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2848 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: West Des Moines, Iowa (CNN) Donald Trump had every reason to feel optimistic Monday. His poll numbers were up; he had secured two prominent endorsements in the space of a week; and even the weather seemed to be cooperating, with a snowstorm coming in from the west expected to hold off until after midnight.
And then, he lost, coming in second to Ted Cruz
Trump spent January in full-on attack mode against Cruz. Trump questioned whether Cruz qualifies as a "natural-born citizen" eligible to serve as president. He went after the evangelical vote, winning the endorsement of Liberty University President Jerry Falwell, Jr., but didn't back up the appeals with a ground game. And then he sat out the final debate, opting for a rally across town at the same time.
He acknowledged Tuesday that may have backfired. "I think some people were disappointed that I didn't go into the debate," Trump said in New Hampshire.
Trump and his advisers don't have too much time to figure out what went wrong. With Cruz's win and Marco Rubio's much stronger-than-expected finish Monday night, Trump now urgently confronts the danger of the Florida senator chipping away at his establishment backing in upcoming contests.
The second-place finish should serve as a serious reality check for his campaign, which is in large part based on bucking the traditional rules of campaigning and political engagement. Then again, nothing about Trump is conventional.
"People didn't talk about my second place," Trump said Tuesday night. "They didn't talk about it as positively as they should have."
In the air but not on the ground
There was nothing traditional about Trump's campaign style in Iowa.
The Trump campaign remained tight-lipped about its efforts to get voters out, sharing little to nothing about its grassroots and volunteer efforts on the ground. The campaign swatted away reports of a lackluster ground game, insisting that its supporters in Iowa would turn out in the end because they were so eager to elect a non-traditional candidate like Trump.
It was only in the final stretch that Trump showed minimal interest in retail politics.
He began holding more than one event a day. In January, he made his first stop at a Pizza Ranch -- the famous restaurant chain that is a favorite among presidential candidates. Trump even slept at a Holiday Inn in one of his final weekends in the state.
The Texas senator crisscrossed the state, ultimately completing the "full Grassley" by visiting all 99 counties in the state. His campaign developed a massive grassroots operation, that according to the campaign 12,000 volunteers fanned out cross the state knocking on doors and making phone calls. It also recruited dozens of pastors and county chairs.
Rubio, in the meantime, came on and surprised everyone at the end. After Thursday's debate, there were rumblings of a Rubio rise, which were tamped down by the Des Moines Register poll released two days before the caucuses that showed the Florida senator in the mid-teens, far ahead of of the others in the establishment lane like Chris Christie and Jeb Bush, but still significantly behind Trump and Cruz.
Hundreds of Rubio volunteers made phone calls to undecided voters in the days leading up to the caucuses, according to campaign aides. During those calls, they found that a good number of Trump supporters -- some frustrated with the businessman's decision to skip last week's Fox debate -- were switching over to Rubio.
Trump had an improbable run as the national front-runner for most of the summer and fall. Then, in December, he started to trail Cruz in Iowa for the first time. Up until that point, the two men had refused to attack one another, seeming to believe that voters would find a messy mud-wrestling match distasteful.
But at the first sign of losing ground to Cruz here, Trump swiftly reversed course.
Trump also jabbed at Cruz's anti-establishment credentials, wondering out loud why the senator had failed to disclose large loans from Goldman Sachs and Citibank for his Senate campaign.
"The truth is, he's a nasty guy," Trump said in an interview on ABC's "This Week." "Nobody likes him. Nobody in Congress likes him. Nobody likes him anywhere once they get to know him."
Cruz, who has tried to stay close to Trump without antagonizing the billionaire, finally hit back, calling his rival a man of "New York values" and blasting his support for eminent domain. Even then, Cruz and his allies seemed much more conflicted about the strategy and wary that it could backfire.
Prior to running for president, Trump had a reputation for being many things: a ruthless, litigious businessman; a colorful reality television star; the ultimate Manhattan socialite.
It wasn't exactly the image of a Bible reading, church-going family man.
But on the stump, the GOP frontrunner sought to sand down those rough edges.
Two consecutive Sundays before the Iowa caucuses, Trump attended morning church services in the state, even breaking from his usual practice of returning to New York City every night to sleep in his own bed.
All of this has been a part of Trump's months-long and intensifying campaign to win over evangelicals in Iowa -- a sizable and influential constituency with real power to sway the outcome of the caucuses. That outreach became all the more critical when Cruz -- the favorite among Hawkeye State evangelical Christians -- bypassed Trump in the polls for the first time in December.
Cleveland Pastor Darrell Scott, a Trump backer who spearheaded an effort to coalesce African-American pastors around the candidate, said it was difficult to overstate the importance of these endorsements.
Palin "brings a lot of evangelical support with her. Then Jerry Falwell Jr. was the icing on the cake," he said.
A religious leader like Falwell in particular, Scott said, was key to convincing undecided voters and on-the-fence churchgoers.
"In Christianity, the sheep tends to follow their shepherd. They will trust the wisdom and trust the decision of their pastor," Scott said. "So when my pastor thinks highly of him to endorse him, there must be something there."
Ahead of last week's GOP debate, Trump's long-running feud with Fox News was back in full force.
The billionaire publicly grumbled about debate moderator Megyn Kelly, saying if she couldn't treat him fairly, he may skip the event altogether -- not the first time he had threatened to boycott a debate.
"We learned from a secret back channel that the Ayatollah and Putin both intend to treat Donald Trump unfairly when they meet with him if he becomes president," the network's statement read. "A nefarious source tells us that Trump has his own secret plan to replace the Cabinet with his Twitter followers to see if he should even go to those meetings."
Instead, less than three miles down the road from the debate, Trump held a rivaling event to benefit wounded veterans. The venue was filled to capacity; political reporters were suddenly split between covering the Trump event and the debate; and the candidate boasted that he had raised nearly $6 million for veterans in a matter of hours.
But while Trump pulled off a political feat in only the way that Trump can, it was clear that the decision rubbed some Iowans the wrong way.
After all, voters in the Hawkeye State take their responsibly of being first seriously, and the debate that Trump skipped was the final -- and critically important -- debate ahead of the caucuses.
Steve Ziller was one of the 29% that disapproved.
A farmer from Belmond, Ziller was undecided between Trump and Cruz when he attended a Trump rally in Clear Lake on January 9th. Soon after that event, Ziller said he made the decision to support Trump. But that decision quickly got undone when Trump skipped the debate.
"I just think if he's elected president, he's going to have a lot more tougher issues than dealing with a female reporter from Fox," Ziller told CNN the day before the caucuses. "If he would have showed up to the debate and had a good debate, I would have been a 100% for Trump."
On caucus night, Ziller ultimately chose to back Trump. But it wasn't an easy call.
Asked whether the decision was difficult, Ziller responded: "Very." | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2849 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A man almost lost his life on a flight out of Detroit because of a racist flight crew member who apparently forgot that it s 2016 and black women are allowed to be doctors. I know, it seems shocking to someone with that mindset, but we re pretty much over the who not allowing someone to follow their dreams and live up to their potential because of their skin color thing. Unfortunately, the crew of Delta flight DL945 didn t get the memo.When a passenger became unresponsive during the flight, the crew leaped into action looking for a doctor and Dr. Tamika Cross would have done so as well, if they thought someone with her dark complexion was capable of being a medical professional. On Facebook, Cross vented her frustration with representatives of the airline:When Cross initially attempted to inform the crew she was a doctor by raising her hand as she was asked, she was flatly told her silly dark-skinned medical knowledge was useless to them even though a man was dying. Oh no sweetie put ur hand down, we are looking for actual physicians or nurses or some type of medical personnel, we don t have time to talk to you, Cross says a flight attendant informed her, overtalking her attempts to explain that she is a licensed medical professional with condescension. Any physician on board please press your button the crew urged, as no one but Cross had responded. She pushed her button. Oh wow you re an actual physician? the flabbergasted crew member asked before demanding to see Cross s credentials and asking a series of questions that should not be asked when a man is dying and time is of the essence: What type of doctor are you? Where do you work? Why were you in Detroit? Fortunately, a white man stepped forward to save the day because the crew obviously was having a tough time finding a doctor who met their qualifications (apparently white skin being the qualification). Cross was told thanks for your help but he can help us, and he has his credentials. He did not, in fact, show the crew anything, Cross points out in her post.After Mr. White Doctor saved the day, the same crew member had the nerve to come to Cross with questions about treatment before ultimately apologizing for her blatantly racist behavior and trying to bribe Cross with skymiles. Cross refused.Unfortunately, while we have made great progress, we still have a long way to go in terms of race relations in America and Delta is not going to have a very good week trying to make this problem go away.Featured image via Facebook | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2850 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Conform or pay the ultimate price Police seized ten children from an off grid homeschool family in Kentucky on Wednesday after receiving an anonymous tip about the family s traditional lifestyle.The nightmare story began when sheriff s officers set up a blockade around Joe and Nicole Naugler s rural property before entering the premises. Eight of the kids were out with their father but Nicole and two of her oldest children were at home. Nicole attempted to drive away but was subsequently stopped and arrested for resisting (attempting to prevent officers from taking her two boys away).The sheriff then demanded Joe Naugler turn over the other eight children by 10am the next day or face felony charges, an order with which he complied. They are an extremely happy family, said family friend Pace Ellsworth, who asserts that the Nauglers were targeted because of their back to basics life and their decision to homeschool their children.Friends reported no concerns about how the children were being treated by the parents, who follow an educational model called unschooling where the children decide their own curriculum based on the subjects that interest them and what their strengths are. This is the natural way to live, said Ellsworth. It s actually a growing movement. They want to have a personal education and not a factory education. They are completely open about their life. Everyone is learning by living. They are all extremely intelligent. The family s Facebook page entitled My Blessed Little Homestead, is a charming testament to their way of life. The Naugler children are obviously living a blissful free range lifestyle amongst 26 acres of land in Breckinridge County. They frequently post pictures and videos of their children, animals and their off-grid life, reports Off the Grid News. A May 5 post showed a video of a toddler, Mosiah, learning to walk. An April 24 post showed a happy family, gathering around a campfire, roasting marshmallows. The family have set up a GoFundMe page to try and raise money for legal expenses.A website for the family spells out their plight with the heart-wrenching words; This Kentucky family of 12 people, 6 dogs, 2 farm cats and a few random farm animals was just torn apart. Their crime: Living a simple, back to basics life. This shocking story once again illustrates how families attempting to simply get on with their lives in a traditional manner are being treated as extremists by other Americans, snitched on, and targeted by authorities.Here is a Facebook link to the Nagger family business: Blessed Little Grooming Company, LLCVia: InfoWars | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2851 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Says state lawmakers have voted to spend virtually all of the Rainy Day Fund four times since the funds creation.
contextual information: Appealing unsuccessfully to spend more money from the states so-called Rainy Day Fund, state Sen. Rodney Ellis hearkened to legislative history, saying in floor debate May 16: Members, this legislature has voted to use virtually all of the Rainy Day Fund four times since its creation in the late 1980s. The sad truth is that Texans and the (fund) are being held hostage to politics.Back story: GOP Gov. Rick Perry has said hes agreeable with taking about $3.1 billion from the fund, formally called the Economic Stabilization Fund, to help cover the state budget that runs through August. But Perry and many Republicans oppose tapping the fund, which is fed by state oil and gas oil production taxes, for the 2012-13 budget. Perry contends it needs to be protected in case of natural disasters.Democrats, noting the projected multi-billion-dollar shortfall in state revenue needed to maintain current programs, say the current dire circumstances justify taking more from the fund.And is Ellis correct about past legislatures voting four times to virtually empty the fund?Jeremy Warren, Elliss spokesman, said the senator relied on a report by the Center for Public Policy Priorities, a liberal-leaning think tank that advocates for programs serving the poor. To help balance the 2012-13 budget, the center has urged lawmakers to use the fund, which is projected by State Comptroller Susan Combs to have a balance of $9.7 billion by the end of August 2013, or about $6.6 billion if lawmakers stick with applying $3.1 billion from the fund to this years deficit .The centers Feb. 21reportsays: In 1991, the Legislature spent the funds entire balance ($28.8million) on public schools, and in 1993, spent the entire balance ($197 million) for criminal justice.In 2003, to deal with the last economic downturn, the Legislature appropriated $1.3 billion from the Rainy Day Fundalmost every penny of the balance the (state) comptroller forecast through 2005, the report says. Again in 2005, the Legislature appropriated $1.9 billion in Rainy Day funds, using roughly half for 2005 shortfalls, and the other half for 2006-07, spending almost all the $2 billion that was forecast to be available.Next, we confirmed the amounts of rainy-day money that lawmakers could have spent in each of these instances by reviewing biennial revenue forecasts made by respective state comptrollers. Finally, the Legislative Reference Library guided us to a Feb. 3reportby the House Research Organization, a non-partisan arm of the Texas House, specifying how much money the 1991, 1993, 2003 and 2005 Legislatures appropriated from the fund.Punch line: The centers recap is accurate.We rate Elliss statement True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2852 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Gunmen stormed the offices of the satirical newspaper Charlie Hebdo on Wednesday. French President Francois Hollande called the deadly assault a terrorist attack.
Why is Angela Merkel calling for a ban on the full Islamic veil?
Masked gunmen shouting "Allahu akbar!" stormed the Paris offices of a satirical newspaper Wednesday, killing 12 people including the editor and a cartoonist before escaping. It was France's deadliest terror attack in at least two decades.
With a manhunt on, French President Francois Hollande called the attack on the Charlie Hebdo weekly, whose caricatures of the Prophet Muhammed have frequently drawn condemnation from Muslims, "a terrorist attack without a doubt." He said several other attacks have been thwarted in France "in recent weeks."
There was no immediate claim of responsibility for the attack.
France raised its security alert to the highest level and reinforced protective measures at houses of worship, stores, media offices and transportation. Top government officials were holding an emergency meeting and Hollande planned a nationally televised address in the evening. Schools across the French capital closed their doors.
World leaders including President Barack Obama and German Chancellor Angela Merkel condemned the attack, but supporters of the militant Islamic State group celebrated the slayings as well-deserved revenge against France.
The Islamic State group has repeatedly threatened to attack France. Just minutes before the attack, Charlie Hebdo had tweeted a satirical cartoon of that extremist group's leader giving New Year's wishes. Another cartoon, released in this week's issue and entitled "Still No Attacks in France," had a caricature of an extremist fighter saying "Just wait — we have until the end of January to present our New Year's wishes."
The 12 dead included two men who went by the pen names: Charb — the editor and a cartoonist as well — and the cartoonist Cabu, spokeswoman Agnes Thibault-Lecuivre of the Paris prosecutor's office confirmed.
Two police officers were also among the dead, including one assigned as Charb's bodyguard after prior death threats against him, a police official told The Associated Press, speaking on condition of anonymity because of the ongoing investigation.
Just before noon, multiple masked men armed with automatic weapons attacked the newspaper's office in central Paris, nearby worker Benoit Bringer told the iTele network. The attackers went to the second floor and started firing indiscriminately in the newsroom, said Christophe DeLoire of Reporters Without Borders.
"This is the darkest day of the history of the French press," DeLoire said.
Video images on the website of public broadcaster France Televisions showed two gunmen in black at a crossroads who appeared to fire down one of the streets. A cry of "Allahu akbar!" — Arabic for "God is great"— could be heard among the gunshots.
Luc Poignant of the SBP police union said the attackers left in a waiting car and later switched to another vehicle that had been stolen.
Obama's top spokesman said US officials have been in close contact with the French since the attack. "We know they are not going to be cowed by this terrible act," spokesman Josh Earnest said.
On social media, supporters of militant Islamic groups praised the move. One Twitter user who identified themselves as a Tunisian loyalist of Al Qaeda and the Islamic State group called the attack well-deserved revenge against France.
Elsewhere on the Internet, the hashtag #JeSuisCharlie was trending as people expressed support for weekly and for journalistic freedom.
Charlie Hebdo has been repeatedly threatened for its caricatures of the Prophet Muhammad and other controversial sketches. Its offices were firebombed in 2011 after a spoof issue featuring a caricature of the prophet on its cover. Nearly a year later, the publication again published crude Muhammad caricatures, drawing denunciations from around the Muslim world.
Wednesday's attack comes the same day of the release of a book by a celebrated French novelist depicting France's election of its first Muslim president. Hollande had been due to meet with the country's top religious officials later in the day. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2853 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Islamic Justice — Boy Punished for Stealing Bread Claim summaries: Photographs document a roadside stunt, not a Muslim boy having his arm crushed under a truck as a punishment for stealing bread.
contextual information: The photographs displayed above have been circulating on the Internet since at least 2004, usually in email forwards that place them in various Arab/Muslim areas (e.g., Iraq, Iran, Afghanistan, Palestinian territories) and claim that the boy pictured is being punished under a harsh Sharia law system that imposes a penalty grossly out of proportion to the nature of the crime (i.e., having his arm crushed under a vehicle because he stole a loaf of bread). These pictures originated with the Iranian news site PeykeIran, which, along with individuals who have witnessed similar scenes in other countries, confirmed that what the photographs actually depict is performers hustling money from onlookers by staging a common street act. In this act, a subject seemingly allows himself to be run over by a heavy vehicle and then emerges unscathed. This is a common performance, with variations executed by many magicians and accomplished through a variety of means, resulting in no lasting harm. The fact that the subject is a small boy who grimaces his way through the stunt is all part of the act, intended to elicit sympathy and extra cash from onlookers. (Despite his contorted facial expressions, the boy is not seriously or permanently injured by the process.) It is difficult to make any definitive statement about Sharia/Islamic law since customs and enforcement can vary from region to region. However, although the cutting off of hands may sometimes be the prescribed maximum penalty for cases of theft under the strictest interpretations of Sharia, Islamic law resources consistently note that such punishments shall not be applied to children who have not yet reached puberty (defined as the age of 15 for boys), nor for the theft of small-value items or food by the hungry. The maximum sentence for any violation of law is not applied in every case. In robbery and theft cases, for example, the maximum penalty of hand-cutting applies after considering many factors, such as the offender's track record and whether the theft was made for profit. In some cases, such as stealing food due to severe hunger or to prevent death, there may not be a penalty. A person's hand is not amputated when he steals less than the equivalent of 4.374 grams of gold or something that is deemed useless. The penalty for theft (when the above conditions are met) is that the offender's right arm is amputated. The photographs do not depict any form of amputation, and it is the child's left arm that goes under the wheels. Moreover, there are no police, judges, religious authorities, or other officials evident in any of the pictures, just a huckster with a hand-held microphone who drums up business and describes the action for the onlookers visible in the background of the first photo. (Also note the blanket placed under the boy's arm: something that is useful for a staged stunt but is unlikely to be provided or allowed by those intent on severely punishing a lawbreaker.) The versions of these photographs circulated via email generally leave out the last pictures of the original series, which show the same boy after the conclusion of the stunt. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2854 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Does the 'Bar' in 'Bar Exam' Denote a Secret Lawyers' Conspiracy? Claim summaries: A "sovereign citizen" conspiracy theory about the licensing of lawyers is riddled with bad logic and historical inaccuracies.
contextual information: One of the more unusual and complicated theories associated with the sovereign citizen and tax protester movements is the belief that lawyers who are members of bar associations in the United States are, in fact, agents of the British crown and do not have legitimate status in American courts. This theory is partly informed by a false but widely repeated claim that the word "bar" in this context is an acronym for "British Accreditation Register": Here's how the elaborate and confusing theory is outlined in an anonymously-authored essay called "Hiding Behind the Bar," which has been republished and shared in tax protester and sovereign citizen circles for more than a decade: essay During the middle 1600's, the Crown of England established a formal registry in London where barristers [lawyers] were ordered by the Crown to be accredited. The establishment of this first International Bar Association allowed barrister-lawyers from all nations to be formally recognized and accredited by the only recognized accreditation society. From this, the acronym BAR was established denoting (informally) the British Accredited Registry, whose members became a powerful and integral force within the International Bar Association (IBA). Although this has been denied repeatedly as to its existence, the acronym BAR stood for the British barrister-lawyers who were members of the larger IBA. Almost every part of this is factually inaccurate. For one thing, the International Bar Association was founded in 1947, not in the 1600s. Second, we could find no evidence of the existence of a professional association for lawyers called the "British Accredited Registry," either in 2018 or at any previous time in history. 1947 A History of the American Bar, a 1911 book by the Pulitzer Prize-winning legal scholar Charles Warren, contains no mention of any "British Accredited Registry" or "British Accreditation Registry" (with "accredited" and "accreditation" being used variously in different versions of this conspiracy theory). It would also make little sense for a group of lawyers in 17th century England to form a group describing itself as "British." Great Britain (composed of England, Wales and Scotland) does not have, and has never had, a unified courts system, instead being separated into two systems: England and Wales and Scotland. In fact, Great Britain itself was not even formally created until 1707, when the Acts of Union joined the Kingdom of Scotland with the Kingdom of England (which included Wales). book accreditation England and Wales Acts of Union But more broadly, this theory offers a confused summary of the history of "the bar." In the Middle Ages, lawyers in London established four "Inns of Court": Lincoln's Inn, the Inner Temple, the Middle Temple, and Gray's Inn. These were physical buildings but, more figuratively, they were also the professional associations for lawyers working in the more important English courts. A "barrister" was a legal expert or advocate who has been "called to the bar." This is a metonymic phrase which is rooted in the physical barrier that was present in a courtroom, to separate fully qualified lawyers entitled to plead cases before a judge from (roughly speaking) trainee lawyers and members of the public. In modern times, this physical barrier generally separates participants in a trial (such as lawyers, clerks, defendants, the jury, and the judge) from the gallery in which members of the public and the news media sit. established metonymic So someone who has been "called to the bar" has been given the right to advocate before a judge and is thereby known as a "barrister." A "bar association" is, roughly speaking, a professional association for lawyers, akin to a guild. In some jurisdictions, bar associations are limited to barristers (as opposed to solicitors, a different type of lawyer); whereas in others, they are open to all members of the legal profession. In some jurisdictions a bar association is the body that licenses and regulates legal professionals, and in others it is merely a professional association. The "BAR" conspiracy theory essay goes on to say: When America was still a chartered group of British colonies under patent established in what was formally named the British Crown territory of New England the first British Accredited Registry (BAR) was established in Boston during 1761 to attempt to allow only accredited barrister-lawyers access to the British courts of New England. This was the first attempt to control who could represent defendants in the court at or within the bar in America. Today, each corporate STATE in America has it's [sic] own BAR Association, i.e. The Florida Bar or the California Bar, that licenses government officer attorneys, NOT lawyers. In reality, the U.S. courts only allow their officer attorneys to freely enter within the bar while prohibiting those learned of the law lawyers to do so. They prevent advocates, lawyers, counselors, barristers and solicitors from entering through the outer bar. Only licensed BAR Attorneys are permitted to freely enter within the bar separating the people from the bench because all BAR Attorneys are officers of the court itself. Does that tell you anything? A 1930 essay published in the Cornell Law Review (page 393) refers to a bar association's having been established in Boston in 1761, but remember that a bar association is no more than a kind of guild for lawyers. "Bar" is not an acronym for "British Accredited Registry," because that acronym is a fabrication. As with many sovereign citizen theories, the essay builds on the shaky foundations of an inaccurate account of the history of bar associations in the United States and draws confused conclusions about the function and legal status of lawyers. page 393 Many of these claims are based on the etymology of certain words, rather than their modern meaning. For example, the author of the essay referenced above presents the origins of the word "attorney," citing Webster's 1828 dictionary definition, as: "In the feudal law, to turn, or transfer homage and service from one lord to another." That essay also proclaims: Here's where the whole word game gets really tricky. In each State, every licensed BAR Attorney calls himself an Attorney at Law. Look at the definitions above and see for yourself that an Attorney at Law is nothing more than an attorney one who transfers allegiance and property to the ruling land owner. That passage is false. Whatever the older origins of the word "attorney" might be, the modern definition of that word is much broader. Merriam-Webster defines an attorney as simply "one who is legally appointed to transact business on another's behalf." In common American parlance, "attorney" is used interchangeably with "lawyer." defines This fixation on word origins leads to something like a game of Telephone in the logic of the conspiracy theory, with false conclusions being drawn from inaccurate or incomplete premises. Here are more examples, summarized from the essay: The historical origins of the word "esquire" did have to do with the transfer of property between feudal land-owners, but that was hundreds of years ago. This argument is roughly analogous to claiming that because the title "Ph.D" derives from the Latin "philosophiae doctor" ("doctor of philosophy"), microbiologists with Ph.D at the end of their names have no legal right to conduct scientific research because they are actually philosophers and not scientists. "A BAR [British Accredited Registry] licensed Attorney is not an advocate," the theory goes on to falsely claim, "so how can he do anything other than what his real purpose is?": He can't plead on your behalf because that would be a conflict of interest. He can't represent the crown (ruling government) as an official officer at the same time he is allegedly representing a defendant. His sworn duty as a BAR Attorney is to transfer your ownership, rights, titles, and allegiance to the land owner. When you hire a BAR Attorney to represent you in their courts, you have hired an officer of that court whose sole purpose and occupation is to transfer what you have to the creator and authority of that court. It's not clear what the origins of the the fabricated acronym are, but "British Accredited Registry" was invoked as early as 2001 by Austin Gary Cooper, a long-time "sovereign citizen" activist. In 2003, a U.S. District Court in Colorado barred Cooper and his wife Martha Cooper from selling advice on how to avoid paying federal income tax after the couple set up groups called "Taking Back America" and the "Ten Foundation," which advised their paying customers that they could renounce their United States citizenship, call themselves "American citizens" instead, and escape their tax obligations. In 2006, Cooper was given a six-month prison sentence for criminal contempt after failing to comply with that court order, which obliged him to hand over the names of his customers, among other requirements. During court proceedings, Cooper accused the judge of treason and called him a "Nazi bastard" and a "British Accredited Registry" lawyer, saying: "You people are going to destroy our country. British accredited registry bar association, you're going to destroy our country ..." 2001 barred sentence proceedings In 2017, prosecutors in Tennessee charged Cooper, who is now 69 years old, with 10 counts of forgery and filing a fraudulent lien. The case was ongoing as of January 2018. charged ongoing Warren, Charles. "A History of the American Bar."
Little, Brown and Company, 1911. U.K. Parliament. "Act of Union 1707."
U.K. Parliament. Unknown publication date. Wickser, Philip J. "Bar Associations."
Cornell Law Review (Vol. 15.3, April 1930). Babcock, Chief Judge Lewis T. "Permanent Injunction Order, U.S.A v. Austin Gary Cooper et al."
U.S. District Court for the District of Colorado. 20 November 2003. Morlin, Bill. "Ten Sovereign Citizens Face 320 Felonies in Tennessee."
Southern Poverty Law Center. 28 March 2017. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2855 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Says About 7 in 10 of Oregons inmates are in prison for violent crimes and serious sex offenses.
contextual information: Frankly, PolitiFact Oregon was surprised to spota press release fora new radio campaign ad designed to set the record straight on Oregons prisons laws. We didnt know there was a need. Was there another ballot measure pending? Was somebody spreading falsehoods about prison laws? Didnt Oregonians vote on sentencing back in 2008? What was going on?Steve Doell is a longtime advocate of crime victims and president ofCrime Victims United, which helped get Measure 11 passed in 1994. This ad campaign is his latest venture, a nonprofit that he says is separate from Crime Victims and one that he said is aimed at giving people the facts about prison statistics.He wants to remind voters through the Truth in Sentencing Project that fewer than one in four convicted felons is sent to prison. Less than one-half of one-percent are in prison for drug possession. And this:About 7 in 10 of Oregons inmates are in prison for violent crimes and serious sex offenses including felony assault, armed robbery, kidnapping, manslaughter, child molestation, rape, attempted murder, and murder, he writes in the press release.In the accompanying radio ad, he says two-thirds of prisoners are violent criminals. In short, Oregons system works, he said. Doell got his numbers from theOregon Criminal Justice Commission, which administers Oregon's felony sentencing guidelines and serves as a statistical and data clearinghouse. Off we went, with a detour stop at the Department of Corrections.According to theagencys July 2012 inmate population profile, 9,878 of the 14,186 people in prison were there because of crimes against a person. That is 70 percent, or more than two-thirds. Hold on to the idea of a person crime.The same population profile also tells us that nearly 9,300 of those inmates are in prison for crimes one could describe as violent: Assault, homicide, rape, kidnapping, robbery, sodomy and sex abuse. Thats about 65 percent, which is about two-thirds.We caught up with Craig Prins, the criminal justice commissions executive director, who confirms that 70 percent of inmates have committed a crime against a person -- but he wanted to make sure we understand that that doesnt mean they are all necessarily violent criminals, on par with murderers and child molesters.For example, a drunken driver who doesnt kill anyone is categorized as committing a crime against a person, even though no one was hurt. A drunken driver who hits and kills another person has definitely committed a crime against a person, even though there was no intent to commit homicide. For Prins there is a distinction. For Doell, there isnt. We offer the information for readers to assess.We also have another point that readers may want to keep in mind: More non-violent offenders are being admitted into prison -- which means that the ratio of violent offenders may drop in the future.Thats because in 2008, Oregon voters approved Ballot Measure 57, which increased sentences for drug and property offenders. It was a legislative proposal drafted in response to a more punishing measure sponsored by Doell and others. Property and drug offenders sentenced under Measure 57 are expected to add 1,000 beds to the prison system over 10 years with overall bed growth closer to 2,000.Prins and others onGov. John Kitzhabers Commission on Public Safety have been tasked with finding ways to improve public safety and save money. The commission is to come up with ideas for the 2013 Legislature. And while Doell insists the Truth in Sentencing Project is not in response to an outside force, its clear this governor wants to make changes in state prisons.A June report by the Pew Center on the States, which is providing technical help to Oregon to review numbers and tease out prison growth drivers, states thatOregon in 2011 admitted more low-risk offenders than in 2000. Also, the share ofproperty, drug and other offenders increased from 53 percent of new admits in 2000 to 59 percent in 2011. (p.20) In other words, trends are changing and they may change more with the approval of Measure 57, which went into effect in January.Doell says the state doesnt have the greatest record on correctly projecting bed additions. He also doesnt think Measure 57 will change the ratio that much. I dont think theres going to be a significant change, I think it could be a percentage point or points here and there, he said.We think readers should be mindful that there is a forecast and new sentencing guidelines that may change the ratio in the future, but we dont know for sure by how much, if at all. The state would not hazard a projection other than the overall increase of 2,000 beds, of which at least 1,000 come from Measure 57.As for a ruling? It is factually correct that as of now, 70 percent of inmates are in prison for crimes against a person, and that 65 percent are in there for crimes we can see are violent in nature. That is about seven in 10 or two-thirds. We rate the statement True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2856 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did the greatest number of jobs in February 2021 come from the 'Waiters and Bartenders' sector? Claim summaries: Some online observers critical of U.S. President Joe Biden sought to undercut a broadly positive employment update in March 2021.
contextual information: In March 2021, new employment figures showed that the U.S. economy added 379,000 jobs in February, the first full month of Joe Biden's presidency. The news was greeted with cautious optimism, with the Wall Street Journal reporting that the gains had "set up a stronger recovery" for the spring of 2021, and The Washington Post reporting that the figures had "surpassed analysts' estimates." Politico wrote that: Wall Street Journal Washington Post Politico U.S. employers added a robust 379,000 jobs last month, the most since October and a sign that the economy is strengthening as confirmed viral cases drop, consumers spend more and states and cities ease business restrictions.The February gain marked a sharp pickup from the 166,000 jobs that were added in January and a loss of 306,000 in December. Yet it represents just a fraction of the roughly 10 million jobs that were lost to the pandemic. On social media, other observers in particular those more broadly opposed to Biden sought to undercut the significance of the jobs figures, claiming that a large majority of the increased employment came in one sector, namely food and beverage services. On Twitter, the libertarian economics blog Zerohedge wrote: wrote Of the 379K jobs added, 286K were waiters and bartenders. The stockbroker and financial commentator Peter Schiff tweeted: tweeted 75% of the 379k jobs "created" in Feb. were waiters and bartenders returning to work. Since many restaurants and bars that closed will never reopen there's a limit to how long this can last... The right-wing British blog Guido Fawkes tweeted: tweeted "US economic recovery sees 379,000 jobs added this week, 286,000 were waiters and bartenders. God bless America and cheers!" Those figures were accurately stated, although "waiters and bartenders" was a reductive description of the occupations in question. As a result, we're issuing a rating of "true." The standard measure of job growth is "total nonfarm payroll employment, seasonally adjusted," a metric that is collated and published by the U.S. Bureau of Labor Statistics (BLS), each month. On March 5, the BLS published figures for the preceding month, February 2021, writing that: "Total nonfarm payroll employment rose by 379,000 in February..." In effect, this means that there were 379,000 more jobs in the United States in February than there were in January. published The BLS provides in-depth breakdowns of job gains or losses, and unemployment, including details on the demographic and sectoral contours of each month's data. According to the same set of figures, the "leisure and hospitality" sector gained 355,000 of the 379,000 total new jobs in February (Summary Table B). Summary Table B Of those, 285,900 jobs were specifically in "food services and drinking places" (Table B-1). That's the source of the "286K" figure presented by Zerohedge. Those 285,900 jobs made up 75.4% of the total number of new jobs added in February, the percentage figure provided by Schiff in his tweet. Table B-1 However, the "food services and drinking places" subsector is made up of more than just "waiters and bartenders." The following is how that subsector is defined in the official North American Industry Classification System: defined Industries in the Food Services and Drinking Places subsector prepare meals, snacks, and beverages to customer order for immediate on-premises and off-premises consumption. There is a wide range of establishments in these industries. Some provide food and drink only; while others provide various combinations of seating space, waiter/waitress services and incidental amenities, such as limited entertainment. The industries in the subsector are grouped based on the type and level of services provided. The industry groups are full-service restaurants; limited-service eating places; special food services, such as food service contractors, caterers, and mobile food services; and drinking places. The BLS figures for February 2021 don't specify the proportion of those 285,900 jobs composed of specific occupations, but it's highly unlikely they were all "waiters and bartenders." In 2019, the most recent year for which figures are available, the following was the breakdown of occupations within the "food services and drinking places subsector": breakdown As can be seen from those figures, "waiters and waitresses" made up less than one-third of workers within that subsector. If the distribution of occupations was even broadly similar among the 285,900 new "food services and drinking places" jobs added in February, then it would appear highly unlikely that even a majority of those 285,900 new jobs were made up of "waiters and bartenders" alone. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2857 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Some, try as they might, to say that Hillary Clinton will be soft on Wall Street when the opposite is actually true. She knows just how much Wall Street greed had to do with the recession that began with the housing crisis in 2007. She also knows what we need to do to prevent such a crash from ever happening again. One also can t just throw blanket blame at any one company or bank or lender. The crash was a perfect storm of greed and taking advantage of those who simply didn t know better.Here are Hillary Clinton s remarks from December 5, 2007: Now, who s exactly to blame for the housing crisis? Well, that s always a question that the press and people ask and I think there s plenty of blame to go around.Responsibility belongs to mortgage lenders and brokers, who irresponsibly lowered underwriting standards, pushed risky mortgages, and hid the details in the fine print.Responsibility belongs to the Administration and to regulators, who failed to provide adequate oversight, and who failed to respond to the chorus of reports that millions of families were being taken advantage of.Responsibility belongs to the rating agencies, who woefully underestimated the risks involved in mortgage securities.And certainly borrowers share responsibility as well. Homebuyers who paid extra fees to avoid documenting their income should have known they were getting in over their heads. Speculators who were busy buying two, three, four houses to sell for a quick buck don t deserve our sympathy.But finally, responsibility also belongs to Wall Street, which not only enabled but often encouraged reckless mortgage lending. Mortgage lenders didn t have balance sheets big enough to write millions of loans on their own. So Wall Street originated and packaged the loans that common sense warned might very well have ended in collapse and foreclosure. Some people might say Wall Street only helped to distribute risk. I believe Wall Street shifted risk away from people who knew what was going on onto the people who did not.Wall Street may not have created the foreclosure crisis, but Wall Street certainly had a hand in making it worse. If anyone would bother to take the time to read her proposals to make sure a crash never happens again they d soon realize Hillary s not about to let Wall Street get away with anything. Here are her plans:She s also making sure to hold those who break the rules accountable:And if you re still not convinced, feel free to read a more comprehensive version of her plans HERE.We need comprehensive reform. We need solutions that will no only be strong, but long-lasting and unable to be manipulated by those still trying to scam others. Listening to people go after Hillary and say that she d be weak on Wall Street is not only misguided, but simply wrong. Even Elizabeth Warren supports Clinton s plan.Now, this isn t to put any other candidate down, or try to convince anyone who to vote for. This is simply just laying down the facts.Featured image via Instagram | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2858 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Former NAACP President Ben Jealous said on Wednesday he would seek the Democratic nomination for Maryland governor next year, charging that the Republican incumbent lacked the courage to stand up to President Donald Trump. Jealous, an ally of U.S. Senator Bernie Sanders during his 2016 bid for the Democratic presidential nomination, said incumbent Larry Hogan had failed to oppose Trump policies that would weaken healthcare and education as well as environmental protection of the Chesapeake Bay. Jealous, making his first bid for elected office, is the latest Democrat to try to link an opponent to the Republican president. Approval ratings have sagged for Trump, who has been embroiled in controversy since his May 9 firing of FBI Director James Comey who was overseeing an investigation into possible collusion between Trump’s presidential campaign and Russia. “It seems like every week our governor becomes a little more like the lion in ‘The Wizard of Oz,’ all strength and no political courage,†Jealous, 44, said as he declared his candidacy outside a cousin’s flower shop in Baltimore. Hogan, who did not endorse Trump in the 2016 election, has not said if he will seek re-election. A spokesman did not respond to a request for comment. Democratic presidential nominee Hillary Clinton won Maryland by 26 percentage points in last November’s election. Jealous led the National Association for the Advancement of Colored People, the biggest U.S. civil rights group, from 2008 to 2013. He is the second Democrat to announce his candidacy ahead of Maryland’s June 2018 primary, joining entrepreneur and author Alec Ross. Jealous, if elected, would be Maryland’s first black governor. Jealous, who spearheaded the NAACP’s successful campaign to overturn Maryland’s death penalty in 2012, said he backed raising the minimum wage to $15 a hour from the current $8.75, improving teacher quality, expanding mass transit and improving training for police officers. Hogan has followed a moderate agenda focused on economic growth and cutting regulations and fees. He also has banned fracking, which involves injecting water, sand and chemicals into shale to release natural gas and oil, thus aligning himself with Maryland’s heavily Democratic voter base. He held a 65 percent approval rating among registered voters in a Washington Post-University of Maryland poll in March, but only 41 percent backed him for a second term. Hogan, 61, scored an upset victory in 2014 over Democratic Lieutenant Governor Anthony Brown. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2859 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: World Socialist Web Site
AT&T, the telecommunications and cable TV colossus, announced Saturday that it has struck a deal to acquire the pay TV and entertainment giant Time Warner. The merger, if approved by the Justice Department and US regulatory agencies under the next administration, will create a corporate entity with unprecedented control over both the distribution and content of news and entertainment. It will also mark an even more direct integration of the media and the telecomm industry with the state.
AT&T, the largest US telecom group by market value, already controls huge segments of the telephone, pay-TV and wireless markets. Its $48.5 billion purchase of the satellite provider DirecTV last year made it the biggest pay-TV provider in the country, ahead of Comcast. It is the second-largest wireless provider, behind Verizon.
Time Warner is the parent company of such cable TV staples as HBO, Cinemax, CNN and the other Turner System channels: TBS, TNT and Turner Sports. It also owns the Warner Brothers film and TV studio.
The Washington Post on Sunday characterized the deal as a “seismic shift” in the “media and technology world,” one that “could turn the legacy carrier [AT&T] into a media titan the likes of which the United States has never seen.” The newspaper cited Craig Moffett, an industry analyst at Moffett-Nathanson, as saying there was no precedent for a telecom company the size of AT&T seeking to acquire a content company such as Time Warner.
“A [telecom company] owning content is something that was expressly prohibited for a century” by the government, Moffett told the Post .
Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump, in keeping with his anti-establishment pose, said Saturday that the merger would lead to “too much concentration of power in the hands of too few,” and that, if elected, he would block it.
The Clinton campaign declined to comment on Saturday. Democratic vice-presidential candidate Tim Kaine, speaking on the NBC News program “Meet the Press” on Sunday, said he had “concerns” about the merger, but he declined to take a clear position, saying he had not seen the details.
AT&T, like the other major telecom and Internet companies, has collaborated with the National Security Agency (NSA) in its blanket, illegal surveillance of telephone and electronic communications. NSA documents released last year by Edward Snowden show that AT&T has played a particularly reactionary role.
As the New York Times put it in an August 15, 2015 article reporting the Snowden leaks: “The National Security Agency’s ability to spy on vast quantities of Internet traffic passing through the United States has relied on its extraordinary, decades-long partnership with a single company: the telecom giant AT&T.”
The article went on to cite an NSA document describing the relationship between AT&T and the spy agency as “highly collaborative,” and quoted other documents praising the company’s “extreme willingness to help” and calling their mutual dealings “a partnership, not a contractual relationship.”
The Times noted that AT&T installed surveillance equipment in at least 17 of its Internet hubs based in the US, provided technical assistance enabling the NSA to wiretap all Internet communications at the United Nations headquarters, a client of AT&T, and gave the NSA access to billions of emails.
If the merger goes through, this quasi-state entity will be in a position to directly control the content of much of the news and entertainment accessed by the public via television, the movies and smart phones. The announcement of the merger agreement is itself an intensification of a process of telecom and media convergence and consolidation that has been underway for years, and has accelerated under the Obama administration.
In 2009, the cable provider Comcast announced its acquisition for $30 billion of the entertainment conglomerate NBCUniversal, which owns both the National Broadcasting Company network and Universal Studios. The Obama Justice Department and Federal Communications Commission ultimately approved the merger.
Other recent mergers involving telecoms and content producers include, in addition to AT&T’s 2015 purchase of DirecTV: Verizon Communications’ acquisition of the Huffington Post , Yahoo and AOL; Lionsgate’s deal to buy the pay-TV channel Starz; Verizon’s agreement announced in the spring to buy DreamWorks Animation; and Charter Communications’ acquisition of the cable provider Time Warner Cable, approved this year.
The AT&T-Time Warner announcement will itself trigger a further restructuring and consolidation of the industry, as rival corporate giants scramble to compete within a changing environment that has seen the growth of digital and streaming companies such as Netflix and Hulu at the expense of the traditional cable and satellite providers.
The Financial Times wrote on Saturday that “the mooted deal could fire the starting gun on a round of media and technology consolidation.” Referring to a new series of mergers and acquisitions, the Wall Street Journal on Sunday quoted a “top media executive” as saying that an AT&T-Time Warner deal would “certainly kick off the dance.”
The scale of the buyout agreed unanimously by the boards of both companies is massive. AT&T is to pay Time Warner a reported $85.4 billion in cash and stocks, at a price of $107.50 per Time Warner share. This is significantly higher than the current market price of Time Warner shares, which rose 8 percent to more than $89 Friday on rumors of the merger deal.
In addition, AT&T is to take on Time Warner’s debt, pushing the actual cost of the deal to more than $107 billion. The merged company would have a total debt of $150 billion, making inevitable a campaign of cost-cutting and job reduction.
The unprecedented degree of monopolization of the telecom and media industries is the outcome of the policy of deregulation, launched in the late 1970s by the Democratic Carter administration and intensified by every administration, Republican or Democratic, since then. In 1982, the original AT&T, colloquially known as “Ma Bell,” was broken up into seven separate and competing regional “Baby Bell” companies.
This was sold to the public as a means of ending the tightly regulated AT&T monopoly over telephone service and unleashing the “competitive forces” of the market, where increased competition would supposedly lower consumer prices and improve service. What ensued was a protracted process of mergers and disinvestments involving the destruction of hundreds of thousands of jobs, which drove up stock prices at the expense of both employees and the consuming public.
Dallas-based Southwestern Bell was among the most aggressive of the “Baby Bells” in expanding by means of acquisitions and ruthless cost-cutting, eventually evolving into the new AT&T. Now, the outcome of deregulation has revealed itself to be a degree of monopolization and concentrated economic power beyond anything previously seen. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2860 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Trumps tax reform plan was nothing more than a middle-class tax increase.
contextual information: Like many California Democrats, Assemblyman Phil Ting is no fan of the Republican tax plan signed by President Donald Trump. He has likened it to a tax giveaway for big corporations. The San Francisco lawmaker has proposed a surcharge on large companies in California to claw back some of the billions of tax dollars that would be lost to the state under the plan. Such a bill, Ting said, would help blunt the impact of the federal tax plan on everyday Californians. We wondered, however, whether Ting accurately described the GOP tax plan in the statement he provided to the San Francisco Chronicle on Jan. 21, 2018. Trump's tax reform plan was nothing more than a middle-class tax increase, Ting, who formerly served as San Francisco's Assessor-Recorder, said in the statement. It is unconscionable to force working families to pay the price for tax breaks and loopholes benefiting corporations and wealthy individuals. We decided to check the facts, focusing on the first part of Ting's claim that the tax plan was nothing more than a middle-class tax increase. His words could be considered a burst of political rhetoric, but they also make an assertion about how millions of Americans would be impacted by the GOP plan. Our research involved speaking with experts at the centrist Tax Policy Center and the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation to assess Ting's claim. Both said it was off the mark. What we found is that most taxpayers would be getting a tax cut, Frank Sammartino, a senior fellow at the Tax Policy Center, told us. That includes most middle-income taxpayers, at least in the short run, he said. The Tax Policy Center estimates that 91 percent of those who earn between $50,000 and $85,000 would receive a tax cut averaging about $900 in 2018, Sammartino said. Seven percent in this group would see their taxes go up, he said, while the rest would see their taxes remain the same. Additionally, 93 percent of Americans who earn between $85,000 and $150,000 would experience a tax cut in 2018, averaging $1,800. "We're just not seeing that in the data," Sammartino said of Ting's statement that the plan results in nothing more than a middle-class tax increase. "We're not seeing that it's a tax increase for most people." Scott Greenberg is a senior analyst at the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation. He described the GOP tax plan as a fairly substantial tax cut for the middle class in the short term. In the long term, after many of the provisions in the bill expire (at the end of 2025), the net effect of the tax bill on middle-income households will be more or less zero. The Tax Foundation concluded it will amount to a tax cut of about 1.7 percent of one's after-tax income, on average, for the middle quintile of taxpayers, Greenberg said. Meanwhile, the Tax Policy Center found it will amount to nearly the same amount, a tax cut of about 1.6 percent of one's after-tax income for middle-income earners. Greenberg said the plan accomplishes this by lowering rates for several tax brackets, expanding the standard deduction, and increasing the child tax credit. When asked about the statement, Ting's spokeswoman Jessica Duong pointed to news articles that show some in the middle class will see higher taxes under the GOP bill. She did not counter the estimate that most would see a tax cut. The quote was intended to counter Trump's claim that this is going to be one of the great gifts to the middle-income people of this country that they've ever gotten for Christmas. It is being sold as a middle-class tax cut, but the benefits for such families will expire in 2025 while the corporate tax cuts are permanent, the spokeswoman told us in an email. Assemblymember Ting's use of "nothing more" is intended to counter that misleading billing and highlight the fact that the plan currently and purposefully relies on the middle class paying for future tax cut deficits, she added. We also examined the California Budget and Policy Center's assessment of the tax plan. The group, considered more liberal-leaning, painted a dire picture of the plan's impact on most taxpayers. It warned in a recent post that the plan would do little if anything for middle- and low-income families across the nation, and especially in California. By scaling back the federal income tax deduction for state and local taxes, known as the SALT deduction, the plan would harm many middle-income families. It added that the plan is clearly tilted to wealthy households and major corporations while providing very little, if any, benefit for most middle- and low-income families. National tax experts don't dispute that the wealthy would see larger tax cuts. The top one percent of households by income, for example, would see a tax cut of 3.4 percent, according to the Tax Policy Center. That's about twice the rate of savings compared with middle-class households. The plan cut the corporate tax rate from 35 percent to 21 percent. In California, which has high state and local taxes, the GOP plan is expected to create more financial hardships compared with lower-tax states because it caps state and local income tax deductions. Here's how Forbes.com explained the changes: Under the old tax law, all property taxes paid to state and local governments could be claimed as an itemized deduction. It was also possible to deduct state and local income or sales taxes. The new law bundles all these so-called SALT taxes together and limits the deduction, in total, to $10,000 for both individuals and married couples. For some homeowners in high-tax areas such as California, $10,000 does not come close to covering their combined property and income tax bills. There's also a change that affects mortgage interest deductions for homeowners. Under the previous law, homeowners could write off any interest they pay on mortgages up to $1 million. The new law will limit these deductions to mortgages of $750,000 or less. Given the Golden State's high housing costs, some Californians will be impacted by the new cap. The change, however, impacts new mortgages, not existing ones. Sammartino of the Tax Policy Center told us those factors would hurt some Californians. Even so, he said, the vast majority of middle-class taxpayers in the state will still see a tax cut. The overall tax cuts might be a little bit less, Sammartino said. But in general, probably upwards of 85 percent of the middle class or so should see a tax cut in California for 2018. While the plan's corporate tax cuts are permanent, the individual reductions are temporary. The national PolitiFact took a closer look at who would be paying more once the individual tax cuts expire. It found that all filers who make $75,000 or less annually will see a tax increase. Some of those are middle-class households. Only those income ranges above $75,000 will still see a cut by 2027, according to the PolitiFact analysis. That's a significantly different pattern than in 2019, when every group saves, on average. Republicans hope a future Congress will extend the individual provisions. Experts believe that's likely, though it's not guaranteed. Our ruling Democratic Assemblyman Phil Ting recently claimed the GOP tax plan is nothing more than a middle-class tax increase. That doesn't match up with estimates from the centrist Tax Policy Center and the conservative-leaning Tax Foundation. They project the plan will result in a tax cut for about 90 percent of middle-income households nationwide in 2018. Those cuts would range from about $900 to $1,800. The remaining middle-income households would see their taxes stay the same or go up. The California Budget and Policy Center, a liberal-leaning group, warns the plan will provide little if any help to middle- and low-income earners in high-tax California, given new limits placed on state and local tax deductions. But even with those new caps, plus a change to the mortgage interest deduction, national tax experts told us the vast majority of middle-class Californians -- up to 85 percent -- will still experience a tax cut in the plan's first year. That could change by 2027 after the individual tax cuts expire, when households who make $75,000 or less are expected to see a tax hike. Congress could extend those cuts, though nothing is guaranteed. We rate Ting's claim False. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2861 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: The wealthiest three families now own more wealth than the bottom half of the country.
contextual information: In an opinionarticlehe wrote for the Wall Street Journal, U.S. Sen.Bernie Sanders, I-Vt., called for an end to corporate socialism and made a claim about wealth inequality. The wealthiest three families now own more wealth than the bottom half of the country, and they will do everything they can to block our agenda, wrote Sanders, who is seeking the Democratic nomination for president. The latest-available data back up his statement, and it appears the gap is widening. A note aboutwealth, before we dig in: Many Americans make a good income, have some savings and investments, and own a nice home. But they also have debt, typically from a mortgage, credit cards or other bills. The result is that even some people with relatively healthy incomes, as well as many poorer people, have a negative net worth the more technical term for wealth. Sanders campaign told us his claim is based on a 2017 study from the left-leaning Institute for Policy Studies. It used Forbes list of the 400 richest Americans and data from agold-standardfederal government source on wealth. Those are 2016 figures, from the Federal Reserve Boards Survey of Consumer Finances, which are updated every three years. The study found that the three wealthiest individuals wereBill Gatesof Microsoft with $89 billion, Jeff Bezos of Amazon with $81.5 billion andWarren Buffettof Berkshire Hathaway with $78 billion. Their total wealth of $248.5 billion was higher than the wealth of the bottom 160 million Americans, at $245 billion. Despite Sanders suggestion that the three men would block his agenda, they have expressed centrist political views over the years, and Buffett was a well-known supporter of former PresidentBarack Obama, a Democrat. Whatever their views, Sanders is correct about their wealth, which is on the rise. Forbes latest annual rankingsfor 2018show Bezos, Gates and Buffett still ranked at Nos. 1, 2 and 3, respectively, and that their total wealth was $345 billion. New federal figures for the bottom 160 million Americans arent expected to be released until sometime later in 2019. For the 160 million people at the bottom of the scale, the study used the net worth figure reported by the Fed and then subtracted automobiles and other durable goods such as electronics, furniture, and household appliances, from that figure. Subtracting durable goods from net worth offers us a more accurate depiction of household wealth as these items are not easily sellable and neither appreciate nor hold constant their value, the study said. University of Michigan sociology professorFabian Pfeffer, whose research specialties include wealth inequality, was among a number of economists and wealth inequality experts who told us the federal figures used in the study are the best for assessing wealth in the population. He told us that the wealth gap is much greater in the United States than in other Western industrialized nations. Pfeffer said the top 5% hold more than 70% of all net worth in the United States. Thats compared to 44% in Austria and Sweden, and lower figures in other comparable nations. Sanders said, The wealthiest three families now own more wealth than the bottom half of the country. The latest available figures indicate that the total wealth of Gates, Bezos and Buffett was $248.5 billion, exceeding the total wealth of $245 billion of the bottom half of Americans. We rate Sanders statement True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2862 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: It s a wonder we have any sane children coming out of our Leftist indoctrination think tanks that are being passed off as schools. The Vote Bernie is an especially nice touch The vice principal of Camden Hills Regional High School has America s enemy all figured out: domestic white Christian men with easy access to guns. After a lone gunman killed two civilians and a police officer in Colorado Springs, Colorado, the vice principal, Piet Lammert, took to Facebook to post his thoughts the next day:It s Small Business Saturday. Buy localThere s a show in the Strom tonight. Buy ticketsThe only terrorists we need to fear are domestic white Christian men with easy access to guns. Vote BernieThat is all. Enjoy your dayFive Town CSD Superintendent Maria Libby criticized the post, but defended the administrator. I know Piet and he s someone who genuinely accepts all people, Libby tells WGME. The post does not reflect who he is as a person. She didn t stop there. It was a mistake, Libby says. It was a poor choice in words and it should never have been posted. The superintendent didn t specific what words would have been better to say.After it was posted, Libby said the situation has been handled, without giving any specifics. I have investigated it and I have taken appropriate action, Libby would only say.Lammert took to Facebook to apologize to those I offended, but also to attempt to explain his comments.I am writing to take responsibility and apologize for a post that I made on my private Facebook account yesterday. I mistakenly left my setting open to Public and in doing so made a post that offended some members of our community and beyond. I deeply regret doing so, take full responsibility, and hope that those I offended will accept my apology.Apparently still feeling the public blow back from his remarks, the school administrator posted another apology, saying it was an exaggeration. With true humility, I write to apologize for the offensive statement that I recently posted on Facebook. I did not intend this statement literally when I wrote it it was an exaggeration but soon after realized that it was unintentionally hurtful, offensive, and divisive at a time when more than ever we need compassion and understanding.In short, I did not mean what I said and wish with all my heart that I could take it back. But I need to take responsibility for it nonetheless, because I wrote it. It does not represent who I am or what I believe, but I wrote it. This post is an effort to at least begin to make amends.Had I simply written what I meant, the post would have reflected my urgent distress at the epidemic of mass violence in our country, which more recent events have proven to span all social groups. Ironically, in my effort to point out that we run the risk of simplifying the problem by singling out a particular ethnic group, I did exactly that to the group to which I belong. It was careless and rash.Lambert appears to have removed the offensive post from his Facebook page. He did however, leave this post up on his page, just in case anyone wonders where he stands on the evil NRA. Note the cute little nickname he appears to have given them:// <![CDATA[ (function(d, s, id) { var js, fjs = d.getElementsByTagName(s)[0]; if (d.getElementById(id)) return; js = d.createElement(s); js.id = id; js.src = "//connect.facebook.net/en_US/sdk.js#xfbml=1&version=v2.3"; fjs.parentNode.insertBefore(js, fjs);}(document, 'script', 'facebook-jssdk')); // ]]>NRA: Not Really ApplicablePosted by Piet Lammert on Monday, December 17, 2012WGME attempted to contact the public employee, but Lammert reportedly ignored their requests. Via: EAG News | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2863 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Last week was the week it became official that Donald Trump isn t even trying to be President of the United States. His horrible responses to the Neo-nazi/KKK/White Supremacist hate rally in Charlottesville, Virginia proves that he s only concerned with a tiny portion of the United States, and that s his frightening and adoring base.While Trump s approval ratings continue to fall among most Americans, his base is lapping up Trump s attempts at spurring on racial division.A GOP strategist working campaigns in red and purple states said that while support for Trump generally declined slightly since Charlottesville, support rose among his base, after a decline last month because of the failure on health care and revelations about the Russia investigation. This strategist said many Trump supporters applaud the president s continuing desire to shake up Washington, favor his economic priorities and admire his willingness to speak his mind.Source: Washington PostPolitically, this is stupid.But he said Trump has nonetheless created a longer-term risk. What he s doing that s harmful is he s removing people from the persuadable audience, and that s dangerous, he said. He s taken an event where he could have added 5 percent of people to the persuadable universe and [instead] he s dumped out 10 percent of them. Trump doesn t care, though. The sycophantic worship is far more important to Trump than any sort of reelection strategy and it s certainly more important to him than the future of the Republican Party a party that s only in office because of gerrymandering, voter suppression and really undemocratic (both small and big D ) campaign finance laws.For Trump, appealing to the worst in humanity is that only strategy that works and there is absolutely no sign he ll be letting up on it anytime soon. In fact, the now ousted Steve Bannon, back at the helm of the white supremacist site Breitbart, is vowing to use his platform to keep Trump focused on his nationalist agenda.Featured image via Win McNamee/Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2864 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: First of Two Parts … 1. The Latest Battle in the Class War, Blue Dots vs. Red Heartland, On Thursday, President Trump announced that the U. S. would be withdrawing from the United Nations Framework on Climate Change. Speaking of the deal, which had been signed by President Obama in 2015 but never submitted to the Senate for ratification, Trump said: The Paris Climate Accord is simply the latest example of Washington entering into an agreement that disadvantages the United States to the exclusive benefit of other countries, leaving American workers . . . and taxpayers to absorb the cost in terms of lost jobs, lower wages, shuttered factories, and vastly diminished economic production. At the White House, the audience applauded, and it’s a cinch that across the country, folks in the red states of Trump Nation, too, were pleased. However, elsewhere, especially in the blue cities along the two coasts, opposition to Trump’s decision flowed, fast and furious. Indeed, the reaction was so strong, and so deeply comprehensive — cutting across so many sectors of society and the economy — that one is left to wonder whether or not Trump’s decision will have the stimulative effect in the Heartland that he was hoping for — and that Heartlanders deserve. That is, it’s possible that opposition will thwart efforts to make more use of — or even to continue to use — fossil fuels. We will consider this point more closely later, in Part Two. Yet in the meantime, we can marvel over the totality of hostility: Just about every headline and press report in the Main Stream Media has been critical, with some going out of their way to their negativity. For instance, a writer in Politico declared that Trump’s decision “was about extending a middle finger to the world. †In a similar vein, there was this headline in The New York Daily News: “Trump to World: Drop Dead. †Here, some of us might pause to recall that the Daily News was once the regular read of New York City’s working class, which was always interested in the questions of jobs and growth. But now that the paper is owned by a billionaire, its editorial stance has changed dramatically it no longer reflects Queens and Canarsie, but rather Manhattan and the Hamptons — and that might help account for its vanishing circulation. As for other elite outposts, the reaction was just as fierce. “Hollywood suffers meltdown over Paris Climate Accord†was the headline for a “greatest hits†roundup on Foxnews. com. Meanwhile, the left end of the political system, too, is reacting fiercely. Indeed, the left is reacting with such ferocity that it threatens to jolt our constitutional system. Hence this headline from Roll Call: “New York, California, Washington Form Climate Alliance in Wake of Paris Accord Withdrawal. †An “alliance,†really? How many more states will join? And how far will this alliance go? In addition, the forces have injected yet another disruptive element into our constitutional equation — the idea of dealing directly with foreign powers to undercut U. S. policy. Here’s a New York Times header: “Bucking Trump, These Cities, States and Companies Commit to Paris Accord. †The story outlines the efforts of activists to create their own foreign policy they seek to do so by submitting a climate plan of their own, directly to the United Nations, pledging to meet the requirements of the Paris agreement. According to the Times, the unnamed group includes 30 mayors, three governors, more than 80 university presidents, and more than 100 businesses. Moreover, Bloomberg Philanthropies, the charity of former New York City mayor Michael Bloomberg, has committed $14 million to help fund the effort. Once again, this is strange legal territory the Logan Act, a federal statute since 1799, would seem to specifically forbid this sort of ex parte diplomacy. So why all this fervor for U. S. participation in the Paris agreement? After all, according to the UN’s own figures, if the U. S. doesn’t participate in the Paris deal, the atmospheric temperature will rise by a mere 0. 3 celsius in the next century (that is, if one trusts these sorts of projections). Many will ask: Is it really worth ripping up the political fabric of the U. S. for such a tiny goal? Yet the answer that’s coming back, of course, is an emphatic “Yes!†Thus we come to see that the climate change issue is perhaps better to be regarded as a matter of morality or even theology, as opposed to money, or science. Indeed, maybe it’s akin to a religious revival — that is, a revival for the mostly . And so The New York Times’ David Brooks probably spoke for many in his social class when he entitled his June 2 column, “Donald Trump Poisons the World. †In that piece, Brooks outlined the ultimate rationale for many Trump opponents who have picked up a green hammer (among other kinds of hammers) to wield against the dreaded 45th president: “People yearn for righteousness. They want to feel meaning and purpose in their lives, that their lives are oriented toward the good. †Such emotions can be viewed as either righteous or but either way, they are powerful. By this reckoning, the sacred guideposts of this new worldview include not only the United Nations, but also the European Union. And so it should come as little surprise that American elites openly side with the UN and the EU that is, they prefer to associate themselves with, say, Angela Merkel of Germany, and never . Indeed, in this new world order, Merkel is now routinely considered to be the world’s most moral political leader. 2. China Plays the Green Card, In their untiring enthusiasm to hammer Trump with everything available, the elites have made some curious choices. Here’s a revealing headline from the MSM’s marquee name, the Times: “Trump Hands the Chinese a Gift: The Chance for Global Leadership. †Let’s try to get this straight: China as the global leader, because of climate change? To many, that will seem like quite a stretch, since, under the terms of the Paris agreement, China must make precisely zero cuts in carbon emissions before “around 2030. †In the meantime, China is emitting more carbon dioxide than any other country indeed, even now it emits twice as much as the US. Yet for their part, the Chinese, who seem relentlessly conscious of the strategic goal of the West, even as they themselves continue to industrialize, seem happy to play along with politically correct green thinking. On June 1, China’s Premier Li Keqiang stood alongside EU leaders, intoning about the “global consensus†on climate change, and declaring the “international responsibility†to do something about it. Given such words, nobody seemed to notice that China won’t start doing anything about carbon for another 13 years — maybe. Why the maybe? Let’s remember that this is the same People’s Republic of China that is flagrantly defying adjudicated international law on the high seas in order to protect its strategic interests. Can that same regime really to be trusted to give up its economic interests? To be sure, some American leaders outside of the Trump administration are courageous enough to call out this bizarre process. One such is Sen. Joe Manchin of West Virginia, who last month laid out the stakes to Breitbart News’ Matthew Boyle: About eight billion tons of coal is burned per year in the world. The United States of America burns less than one billion tons of coal a year, so we’re less than one eighth of the world’s consumption. That tells you of all the coal in the world is being burnt somewhere else. Four billion tons is being burned in just China alone. [emphasis added] In other words, the Chinese burn four times as much coal as we do, and yet we’re judged to be the bad guys. Sad! 3. The Coming Battle: Plutocrats vs. People, We shouldn’t kid ourselves: The actions of the Trump administration notwithstanding, it’s still possible that green activists — greatly bolstered, as we have seen, by overall enthusiasm — will succeed in stopping fossil fuels in their tracks. Indeed, if we go to the web page of the same Bloomberg Philanthropies, we see that already, Bloomberg and his allies have succeeded in shutting down 251 coal plants. So we can ask: Did anything Trump decided on Thursday make it more likely that any one of those plants will ? In the meantime, we can be sure that all the actors, activists, litigators, and regulators will keep right on going, true to their righteous mission of domestic energy shutdowns, freelance international diplomacy — and anything else they can think of. Indeed, from their point of view, if bashing coal and fossil fuels means bashing Trump as well — all the better. And of course, such also has a way of becoming . For instance, Frank Rich, the longtime New York Times theater critic and columnist now writing for the New York magazine, looks askance at any possible effort, election, to understand the motivations of Trump supporters. Rich derides such efforts as “Hillbilly Chic,†adding: For those of us who want to bring down the curtain on the Trump era as quickly as possible, this pandering to his voters raises a more immediate and practical concern: Is it a worthwhile political tactic that will actually help reverse Republican rule? Or is it another counterproductive detour? In other words, no sympathy for the hillbilly from that New Yorker — nor from many others. Of course, the idea that city dwellers look down their noses at the “rubes†in the rest of America is nothing new in fact, Manhattanites have been known to proudly proclaim their arrogance. Moreover, it’s no shock that most Democrats — Manchin is just about by himself in his party on climate change — are inclined to oppose just about anything that a conservative or a Republican might wish to do. That is, after all, what partisan politics is often about. However, what might be surprising is the degree to which the very wealthy have turned against one of the historic engines of economic growth, namely, fossil fuels. In fact, we can look back at the last three centuries and see that energy consumption has soared a since George Washington’s time. It’s that growth in energy consumption that has fueled, literally, the standard of living that we enjoy today. And, of course, nobody enjoys it more than the very wealthy. In fact, the environment is, according crucial metrics, vastly better than it was in the old days, when people hunched over unventilated burning hearths for cooking and for warmth, or else hunted down whales, nearly to extinction, for their blubber, which provided scanty amounts of fuel and tallow. Yet today we find that many of the wealthiest families are now distancing themselves from economic growth. Or, as they might prefer to say it, they are demanding that we “evolve†beyond fossil fuels. Of course, it’s never clear whether or not the world is ready to make such an economic leap of faith. Indeed the reader might ask himself or herself: Is it wise to trust our “betters†when they tell us that the renewables — solar, wind, biomass, and geothermal energy — can be expanded rapidly enough to protect the of the average American? In fact, according to the National Academy of Sciences, in 2015 those four renewables made up less than eight percent of total U. S. energy consumption. So realistically, what are the chances that they could be expanded sufficiently to take the place of the energy sources (fossil fuels, nuclear, hydropower) that are now out of fashion in high circles? Or, is it wiser for the ordinary Joe and Jane to conclude that the Al Gore class simply doesn’t care what happens to them? After all, the last few decades of environmental politicking, which have undercut so many Heartland industries and jobs, would seem to point to that bleak conclusion. Indeed, speaking of haute, perhaps the most astonishing bit of plutocratic can be seen in the choices made by the Rockefeller Family Fund, which announced in 2016 that, having deemed ExxonMobil to be “morally reprehensible,†because of its ongoing energy production, it was therefore choosing to divest itself of its stock in the company. This is a remarkable turn of events, since ExxonMobil is descended from John D. Rockefeller’s Standard Oil. In other words, the fortune that the Rockefellers enjoy to this day comes from fossil fuels. We might note that “divestment†is not the same as “giving the money away. †That is, the Rockefellers, this branch of the family at least, are simply transferring their wealth from one stock to another. Meanwhile, the rest of us might observe: If gains are judged to be they should be renounced, not simply shuffled. Yet in the meantime, these Rockefellers will now be free to join the swelling blue chorus that regards climate change as a greater threat than all the other threats, including — but certainly not limited to — terrorism, North Korea, and the Zika virus. Yes, these are curious choices that some, especially in the toniest zip codes, are making. But as we have seen and will see, they aren’t just making these choices for themselves instead, they seek to make choices for the rest of us. So that’s why should all be paying attention, and seeking appropriate strategies in response. Next in Part Two: Fighting for the Many: The consequences of economic growth, slow or fast, for America. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2865 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Republicans are literally using every excuse they can come up with to avoid investigating Donald Trump.After years of frivolously investigating Hillary Clinton and President Obama, Republicans are refusing to investigate Trump over his various ties to Russia, which includes Russia interfering in our election process on his behalf and Michael Flynn illegally negotiating with Russian officials about the sanctions put in place by President Obama and lying to Mike Pence about it.Republicans have claimed that investigating Trump would be a waste of time and money, conveniently ignoring the fact that they wasted millions and spent years investigating Benghazi, an investigation that surpassed the 9/11 and Watergate investigations as the longest in American history. And that effort turned up nothing.However, Republicans know that if they investigate Trump they will end up actually finding evidence that would warrant immediate impeachment, and they don t want to lose their rubber stamp in the White House and piss off conservative voters in the process.House Intelligence Chairman GOP Rep. Devin Nunes is even going so far as to claim that such an investigation would be a witch hunt similar to McCarthyism. This is almost like McCarthyism revisited, Nunes said at a Republican convention in California. We re going to go on a witch hunt against, against innocent Americans. You read that right. Nunes actually just claimed that Trump and his accomplices are totally innocent even though the evidence is stacking up.According to Nunes, the intelligence community has no evidence of Trump and his administration doing anything suspicious. At this point there s nothing there, Nunes continued. Once we begin to look at all the evidence, and if we find any American that had any contact with Russian agents or anybody affiliated with the Russian government, then we ll be glad to, at that point, you know, subpoena those people before the House and let the legislative branch do its oversight and then we would recommend it over to, you know, the appropriate people. Of course, that s complete bullshit. Not only did the intelligence community agree that Russia interfered with the election, Michael Flynn was forced to resign for being in contact with Russian officials prior to Trump taking office. Also, Trump and his team are trying really hard to kill any talk of an investigation, even desperately asking the FBI to shut it down.Trump s business has ties to Russian oligarchs who are close to Vladimir Putin. Trump s taxes would probably show his ties to Russia but he refuses to release them because they would incriminate him.Russia has literally been a scandal for Trump since before Election Day and it has only continued to get bigger since he took office last month.But Nunes is ignoring all of that, claiming that an investigation against Trump would be against the American people. He also subscribed to Trump s claim that the media is fake news. At this point, we can t go on a witch hunt against the American people, any American people who have not had any contact just because they appeared in a news story, Nunes concluded.Again, this is outrageously absurd. The only reason Republicans don t want to investigate Trump is because they don t want to investigate one of their own. If Trump were a Democrat, Republicans would have impeached him on day one. It is the duty of Congress to investigate Trump s Russia scandal. That s not McCarthyism because Joe McCarthy accused hundreds of people of being communists without any proof whatsoever. There is a lot of proof that Trump is in bed with the Russians. But Republicans are hypocrites and that s why they should all be thrown out of office in 2018 so that Democrats can take over Congress and impeach Trump and his entire administration.Featued image via Andrew Harrer Pool/Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2866 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A Hong Kong court on Tuesday allowed three jailed young activists, who spearheaded pro-democracy protests that brought much of the Chinese-ruled city to a halt in 2014, a final chance to appeal against their sentences. Hong Kong s appeals court jailed Joshua Wong, 21, Alex Chow, 27, and Nathan Law, 24, in August for illegal assembly, a ruling that angered rights activists who fear creeping interference by Communist Party rulers in Beijing in the former British colony. The three are serving six, seven and eight-month jail terms, respectively but have been released on bail. The trio helped lead the largely peaceful Umbrella Movement that blocked major roads for 79 days in 2014, demanding Beijing grant Hong Kong full democracy. Hong Kong has been governed under a one country, two systems formula since its return from British to Chinese rule in 1997, allowing freedoms not enjoyed on mainland China that include an independent judiciary but not a fully democratic vote. In a short hearing on Tuesday, Hong Kong s Court of Final Appeal granted the trio leave to appeal, with the case to be heard on January 16 with the three to remain on bail until then. The next legal steps will likely be scrutinized closely, with the jailings having shaken confidence in Hong Kong s vaunted rule of law. Wong, Chow and Law were sentenced last year to community service for unlawful assembly. However, Reuters reported that Justice Secretary Rimsky Yuen had overruled other senior colleagues to re-open the case and push for a harsher sentence that eventually led to their imprisonment. I know the world is having their eyes on us to see whether the judges, our legal professionals, will restore the confidence of our jurisdiction. Or whether it will smash the confidence of the people, not only in Hong Kong but also around the world, Chow told reporters. The verdict given in the future will matter a lot and will redefine whether our constitution | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2867 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Millions of Nepalis vote on Sunday to choose a new parliament and seven state assemblies more than a decade after the end of a civil war. The two-phase election is the first in Nepal since it turned into a federal republic and abolished monarchy in 2008. Here is a chronology of events in the Himalayan country since then: 2008, May 28 Special Constituent Assembly elected in April votes to abolish the 239-year-old monarchy and turns Nepal into a republic. 2008, July 23 The assembly elects Ram Baran Yadav as Nepal s first president. 2008, Aug. 15 Former rebel commander Pushpa Kamal Dahal, also known as Prachanda, is elected as prime minister. He had led a decade-long Maoist civil war that ended two years earlier. 2009, May 4 Prachanda steps down following a row with the president over the sacking of the army chief, leading to political instability in the country. 2010, May 28 The Constituent Assembly extends its term after failing to deliver a new charter within the stipulated period of two years. 2012, May 28 The assembly is dissolved without adopting any constitution amid wrangling among political parties. 2013, Nov 19 A second Constituent Assembly is elected to continue the unfinished task of drafting the charter. 2015, Apr. 25 Worst earthquake on record jolts Nepal, killing 9,000 people and bringing political parties together to adopt the charter and focus on reconstruction. 2015, Sept. 20 The Constituent Assembly approves the new charter, turning Nepal into a secular federal democratic republic. Ethnic Madhesis living in the southern plains reject the new charter, calling it discriminatory. 2015-2016 More than 50 people killed during protests by the Madhesis demanding a unified homeland in their region. Activists block trade points with India leading to crippling fuel and medicine shortages. 2017, May-Sept. First elections to local bodies in 20 years held. Lawmakers reject a government proposal to amend the constitution to meet some of the demands of the Madhesi minority. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2868 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Blacks Don't Read Claim summaries: Dee Lee penned a screed opining that blacks 'don't read'?
contextual information: Claim: Dee Lee penned a screed opining that blacks 'don't read.' INCORRECTLY ATTRIBUTED Example: [Collected via e-mail, January 2002] Blacks Don't Read This is very deep, and unfortunately, very true! This is a heavvvvy piece and a Caucasian wrote it. THEY ARE STILL OUR SLAVESWe can continue to reap profits from the Blacks without the effort of physical slavery. Look at the current methods of containment that they use on themselves: IGNORANCE, GREED, and SELFISHNESS. Their IGNORANCE is the primary weapon of containment. A great man once said, "The best way to hide something from Black people is to put it in a book." We live now in the Information Age. They have gained the opportunity to read any book on any subject through the efforts of their fight for freedom, yet they refuse to read. There are numerous books readily available at Borders, Barnes & Noble, and Amazon.com, not to mention their own Black Bookstores that provide solid blueprints to reach economic equality (which should have been their fight all along), but few read consistently, if at all. GREED is another powerful weapon of containment. Blacks, since the abolition of slavery, have had large amounts of money at their disposal. Last year they spent 10 billion dollars during Christmas, out of their 450 billion dollars in total yearly income (2.22%). Any of us can use them as our target market, for any business venture we care to dream up, no matter how outlandish, they will buy into it. Being primarily a consumer people, they function totally by greed. They continually want more, with little thought for saving or investing. They would rather buy some new sneaker than invest in starting a business. Some even neglect their children to have the latest Tommy or FUBU. And they still think that having a Mercedes, and a big house gives the "Status" or that they have achieved the American Dream. They are fools! The vast majority of their people are still in poverty because their greed holds them back from collectively making better communities. With the help of BET, and the rest of their black media that often broadcasts destructive images into their own homes, we will continue to see huge profits like those of Tommy and Nike. (Tommy Hilfiger has even jeered them, saying he doesn't want their money, and look at how the fools spend more with him than ever before!). They'll continue to show off to each other while we build solid communities with the profits from our businesses that we market to them. SELFISHNESS, ingrained in their minds through slavery, is one of the major ways we can continue to contain them. One of their own, Dubois said that there was an innate division in their culture. A "Talented Tenth" he called it. He was correct in his deduction that there are segments of their culture that has achieved some "form" of success. However, that segment missed the fullness of his work. They didn't read that the "Talented Tenth" was then responsible to aid the Non-Talented Ninety Percent in achieving a better life. Instead, that segment has created another class, a Buppie class that looks down on their people or aids them in a condescending manner. They will never achieve what we have. Their selfishness does not allow them to be able to work together on any project or endeavor of substance. When they do get together, their selfishness lets their egos get in the way of the goal. Their so-called help organizations seem to only want to promote their name without making any real change in their community. They are content to sit in conferences and conventions in our hotels, and talk about what they will do, while they award plaques to the best speakers, not the best doers. Is there no end to their selfishness? They steadfastly refuse to see that "TOGETHER EACH ACHIEVES MORE (TEAM)! They do not understand that they are no better than each other because of what they own. In fact, most of those Buppies are but one or two paychecks away from poverty. All of which is under the control of our pens in our offices and our boardrooms. Yes, will continue to contain them as long as they refuse to read, continue to buy anything they want, and keep thinking they are "helping" their communities by paying dues to organizations which do little other than hold lavish conventions in our hotels. By the way, don't worry about any of them reading this letter, remember, 'THEY DON'T READ!!!!' (Prove them wrong. Please pass this on!) Origins: Our earliest sighting of this polemic which excoriates "buppies" and other blacks for their presumed lack of literacy and bling-motivated consumer choices dates to October 2001, when it appeared as an unattributed item in the New York Beacon, a newspaper that focuses on African-American issues. It subsequently arrived in our inbox in January 2002 prefaced by the claim that it had been written by a Caucasian. In October 2002 we began receiving versions stating radio personality Dee Lee had read the item on air that morning on a New York station. (A "buppie," says the Urban Dictionary, is "A highly sophisticated and upper class black person. Usually a black city or suburban resident with a well-paid professional job and an affluent lifestyle: b[lack] + [y]uppie.") buppie While the question of who wrote the piece remains murky, we can rule out two people who have often been erroneously pointed to as its author. Radio personality Dee Lee, then of Philadelphia's Power 99 FM's "Dream Team" and Saint Louis' 100.3 "The Dee Lee Morning Show," firmly asserts he is neither the item's author nor did he ever read the piece on air. He said in a 28 January 2007 blog post that "I NEVER wrote nor read this article on NYC radio!!," adding that he "would in no way write or support such ignorance, especially degrading my own race." Dee Lee blog post Likely as a result of African-American radio jock Dee Lee's name having become attached to the screed, a Caucasian certified financial planner of the same name has been mistakenly pointed to as the source of the item. (The Internet-circulated piece, after all, always contained the claim that it had been written by a white person.) Dee Lee of Harvard Financial Educators, author of numerous books in the financial planning field, including Let's Talk Money, has seen the piece circulated with not only her name and business affiliation attached, but also her e-mail address and photo. She emphatically denies any association with the screed, stating "I did not author nor did I read the article in question on the radio." denies Although the actual author of the piece is still unknown to us, Dr. Arthur Lewin of the Black and Hispanics Studies Department at Bernard M. Baruch College of the City University of New York claims to have edited the article into its present form many years ago and titled it "They Are Still Our Slaves." However, pointing to him as the original author of the piece is problematic, given that he claims his involvement was limited to editing an item titled "How to Make an Economic or Ghetto Slave" into "They Are Still Our Slaves," which he states he "received" (but not how or from whom). As to what to make of the item, some analysts have expressed doubt that it was penned by a white racist, instead finding in the text reason to believe it the work of an African-American laboring to make a point. Said Tony Norman of the Pittsburgh Post-Gazette: "Besides its didacticism, this letter is full of the racial self-loathing that permeates much so-called 'uplift' literature these days. There is no substantive critique of a community's behavior here. It relies on stereotypes to make what are, at best, questionable points. It was, in all likelihood, written by a black person who was trying a little too hard to be 'deep' and righteous." Barbara "deeply disturbing" Mikkelson Last updated: 22 June 2010 Smokes, Saundra. "E-Mail Decries Slave Mentality." The [Syracuse] Post-Standard. 1 December 2002 (p. C2). The New York Beacon. "Negativity or a Wake-Up Call: They Are Still Our Slaves." 17 October 2001. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2869 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: 2016 elections by Robin D.G. Kelley
The author writes: “I am not suggesting that white racism alone explains Trump’s victory. Nor am I dismissing the white working class’s very real economic grievances. It is not a matter of disaffection versus racism or sexism versus fear. Rather, racism, class anxieties, and prevailing gender ideologies operate together, inseparably, or as Kimberlé Crenshaw would say, intersectionally.” Trump Says Go Back, We Say Fight Back by Robin D.G. Kelley
This article previously appeared in Boston Review .
“We need to reject a thoroughly bankrupt Democratic Party leadership that is calling for conciliation and, in Obama’s words, “rooting for [Trump’s] success.”
“If we are to keep the enormity of the forces aligned against us from establishing a false hierarchy of oppression, we must school ourselves to recognize that any attack against Blacks, any attack against women, is an attack against all of us who recognize that our interests are not being served by the systems we support. Each one of us here is a link in the connection between antipoor legislation, gay shootings, the burning of synagogues, street harassment, attacks against women, and resurgent violence against Black people.” — Audre Lorde, “Learning from the 60s”
Donald J. Trump’s election was a national trauma, an epic catastrophe that has left millions in the United States and around the world in a state of utter shock, uncertainty, deep depression, and genuine fear. The fear is palpable and justified, especially for those Trump and his acolytes targeted—the undocumented, Muslims, anyone who “looks” undocumented or Muslim, people of color, Jews, the LGBTQ community, the disabled, women, activists of all kinds (especially Black Lives Matter and allied movements resisting state-sanctioned violence), trade unions. . . . the list is long. And the attacks have begun; as I write these words, reports of hate crimes and racist violence are flooding my inbox.
The common refrain is that no one expected this. (Of course, the truth is that many people did expect this, just not in the elite media.) At no point, this refrain goes, could “we” imagine Trump in the Oval office surrounded by a cabinet made up of some of the most idiotic, corrupt, and authoritarian characters in modern day politics—Rudolph Giuliani, Chris Christie, Newt Gingrich, Sarah Palin, John Bolton, Ben Carson, Jeff Sessions, David “Blue Lives Matter” Clarke, Joe Arpaio, to name a few. Meanwhile, paid professional pundits are scrambling to peddle their analyses and to normalize the results—on the same broadcast media that helped deliver Trump’s victory by making him their ratings-boosting spectacle rather than attending to issues, ideas, and other candidates (e.g., Bernie Sanders or Jill Stein). They deliver the same old platitudes: disaffected voters, angry white men who have suffered economically and feel forgotten, Trump’s populist message represented the nation’s deep-seated distrust of Washington, ad infinitum. Some liberal pundits have begun to speak of President-Elect Trump as thoughtful and conciliatory, and some even suggest that his unpredictability may prove to be an asset. The protests are premature or misplaced. All of this from the same folks who predicted a Clinton victory.
“Trump’s followers are attracted to his wealth as metonym of an American dream that they, too, can enjoy once America is ‘great’ again.”
But the outcome should not have surprised us. This election was, among other things, a referendum on whether the United States will be a straight, white nation reminiscent of the mythic “old days” when armed white men ruled, owned their castle, boasted of unvanquished military power, and everyone else knew their place. Henry Giroux’s new book America at War With Itself made this point with clarity and foresight two months before the election. The easy claim that Trump appeals to legitimate working-class populism driven by class anger, Giroux argues, ignores both the historical link between whiteness, citizenship, and humanity, and the American dream of wealth accumulation built on private property. Trump’s followers are not trying to redistribute the wealth, nor are they all “working class”—their annual median income is about $72,000. On the contrary, they are attracted to Trump’s wealth as metonym of an American dream that they, too, can enjoy once America is “great” again—which is to say, once the country returns to being “a white MAN’s country.” What Giroux identifies as “civic illiteracy” keeps them convinced that the descendants of unfree labor or the colonized, or those who are currently unfree, are to blame for America’s decline and for blocking their path to Trump-style success.
For the white people who voted overwhelmingly for Trump, their candidate embodied the anti-Obama backlash. Pundits who say race was not a factor point to rural, predominantly white counties that went for Obama in 2008 and 2012, but now went for Trump, and to the low black and Latinx voter turnout. However, turnout was down overall, not just among African Americans. Post-election analysis shows that as a percentage of total votes the black vote dropped only 1 percent compared with the 2012 election, even while the number of black ballots counted decreased by nearly 11 percent. (Why this happened is beyond the scope of this essay, but one might begin with Greg Palast’s findings about voter suppression and the use of “crosscheck” to invalidate ballots.) Moreover, claims that nearly a third of Latinxs went for Trump have been disputed by the website Latino Decision, whose careful research puts the figure at 18 percent. The turnout does not contradict the fact that Trump drew the clear majority of white votes. This is not startling news.
“We cannot ignore the fact that the vast majority of white men and a majority of white women, across class lines, voted for a platform and a message of white supremacy.”
If history is our guide, “whitelash” usually follows periods of expanded racial justice and democratic rights. In the aftermath of Reconstruction, there were many instances in which southern white men switched from the biracial, abolitionist Republicans to the “redeemers,” whether it be the Democrats or, in states like Texas, the “White Man’s Party.” (No ambiguity there.) Or in the 1880s and ’90s, when white Populists betrayed their Black Populist allies in a united struggle to redistribute railroad land grants to farmers, reduce debt by inflating currency, abolish private national banks, nationalize railroads and telegraphs, and impose a graduated income tax to shift the burden onto the wealthy, among other things. Many of these one-time white “allies” joined the Ku Klux Klan, defeated the Lodge Force Bill of 1890 which would have authorized federal supervision of elections to protect black voting rights, and led the efforts to disfranchise black voters. Or the late 1960s, when vibrant struggles for black, brown, American Indian, Asian American, gay and lesbian, and women’s liberation, the anti-war movement, and student demands for a democratic revolution were followed by white backlash and the election of Richard Nixon—whose rhetoric of “law and order” and the “silent majority” Trump shamelessly plagiarized.
Of course, Hilary Clinton did win the popular vote, and some are resorting to the easy lament that, were it not for the arcane Electoral College (itself a relic of slave power), we would not be here. One might add, too, that had it not been for the gutting of the Voting Rights Act opening the door for expanded strategies of voter suppression, or the permanent disfranchisement of some or all convicted felons in ten states, or the fact that virtually all people currently in cages cannot vote at all, or the persistence of misogyny in our culture, we may have had a different outcome. This is all true. But we cannot ignore the fact that the vast majority of white men and a majority of white women, across class lines, voted for a platform and a message of white supremacy, Islamophobia, misogyny, xenophobia, homophobia, anti-Semitism, anti-science, anti-Earth, militarism, torture, and policies that blatantly maintain income inequality. The vast majority of people of color voted against Trump, with black women registering the highest voting percentage for Clinton of any other demographic (93 percent). It is an astounding number when we consider that her husband’s administration oversaw the virtual destruction of the social safety net by turning welfare into workfare, cutting food stamps, preventing undocumented workers from receiving benefits, and denying former drug felons and users access to public housing; a dramatic expansion of the border patrol, immigrant detention centers, and the fence on Mexico’s border; a crime bill that escalated the war on drugs and accelerated mass incarceration; as well as NAFTA and legislation deregulating financial institutions.
Still, had Trump received only a third of the votes he did and been defeated, we still would have had ample reason to worry about our future.
“White privilege is taken for granted to the point where it need not be named and can’t be named.”
I am not suggesting that white racism alone explains Trump’s victory. Nor am I dismissing the white working class’s very real economic grievances. It is not a matter of disaffection versus racism or sexism versus fear. Rather, racism, class anxieties, and prevailing gender ideologies operate together, inseparably, or as Kimberlé Crenshaw would say, intersectionally. White working-class men understand their plight through a racial and gendered lens. For women and people of color to hold positions of privilege or power over them is simply unnatural and can only be explained by an act of unfairness—for example, affirmative action. White privilege is taken for granted to the point where it need not be named and can’t be named. So, as activist/scholar Bill Fletcher recently observed, even though Trump’s call to deport immigrants, close the borders, and reject free trade policies appealed to working-class whites’ discontent with the effects of globalization, Trump’s plans do not amount to a rejection of neoliberalism. Fletcher writes, “Trump focused on the symptoms inherent in neoliberal globalization, such as job loss, but his was not a critique of neoliberalism. He continues to advance deregulation, tax cuts, anti-unionism, etc. He was making no systemic critique at all, but the examples that he pointed to from wreckage resulting from economic and social dislocation, resonated for many whites who felt, for various reasons, that their world was collapsing.” Yet Fletcher is quick not to reduce white working-class support for Trump to class fears alone, adding, “This segment of the white population was looking in terror at the erosion of the American Dream, but they were looking at it through the prism of race.”
A New York Times poll shows that Trump supporters identified immigration and terrorism, not the economy, as the two most important issues in the campaign. Immigration and terrorism are both about race—Mexicans and Muslims. That there are “illegal” immigrants from around the globe, including Canada, Israel, and all over Europe doesn’t matter: anti-immigrant movements target those who can be racially profiled. And while Trump’s America fears “terrorism,” it does not disavow homegrown terrorist organizations such as the Ku Klux Klan, despite the fact that white nationalist movements are responsible for the majority of violent terrorist attacks on U.S. soil. On the contrary, Trump was not only endorsed by white nationalists and U.S.-based fascists, but during the campaign he refused to renounce their support, and Trump’s leading candidate for attorney general, Rudy Giuliani, has openly called Black Lives Matter “terrorists.”
So where do we go from here? If we really care about the world, our country, and our future, we have no choice but to resist. We need to reject a thoroughly bankrupt Democratic Party leadership that is calling for conciliation and, in Obama’s words, “rooting for [Trump’s] success.” Pay attention: Trump’s success means mass deportation; massive military spending; the continuation and escalation of global war; a conservative Supreme Court poised to roll back Roe v. Wade, marriage equality, and too many rights to name here; a justice department and FBI dedicated to growing the Bush/Obama-era surveillance state and waging COINTELPRO-style war on activists; fiscal policies that will accelerate income inequality; massive cuts in social spending; the weakening or elimination of the Affordable Care Act; and the partial dismantling and corporatization of government.
What must resistance look like? There are at least five things we have to do right now:
1. Build up the sanctuary movement.
In the 1980s, when nearly one million refugees fled U.S.-backed dictatorships in Guatemala and El Salvador, churches offered shelter, sanctuary, and assistance to those seeking political asylum, and over thirty cities were subsequently designated “sanctuary cities” by their local governments. The Obama administration’s deportations of undocumented workers rebooted the sanctuary movement, along with a vibrant immigrant rights movement that pushed the president to use executive authority to launch the Deferred Action for Childhood Arrivals (DACA) program and the Deferred Action for Parents of Americans and Lawful Permanent Residents (DAPA). Trump has vowed to end both programs, leaving some five million immigrants vulnerable to deportation and identifiable through their applications, and he has promised to immediately cut all federal funding for sanctuary cities. To those who argue that millions of undocumented people are not “political refugees,” I counter that Trump’s war on immigrants is driven entirely by his quest to take power—they will become casualties of his political machinations. Some states have already outlawed the longstanding principle of sanctuary status, but this should not deter us from strengthening and expanding the sanctuary movement to other institutions. For example, many of us who work in the University of California system are working to turn our campuses into sanctuaries—preferably with legal and administrative backing. But even without the law behind us, we must act on moral principle.
2. Defend all of our targeted communities.
We must defend against hate crimes, Islamophobia, anti-black racism, attacks on queer and trans people, and the erosion of reproductive rights. There is no need to reinvent the wheel since there are already hundreds of organizations across the country dedicated to the fight, including INCITE: Women of Color Against Violence, Radical Women, the Immigrant Solidarity Network, the Praxis Project, the Praxis Center, CAAAV: Organizing Asian Communities, the Coalition for Humane Immigrant Rights of Los Angeles (CHIRLA), the African American Policy Forum, the Network Against Islamophobia, and Causa Justa, to name only a few. One of the main targets of attack, of course, is the Movement for Black Lives, along with the dozens of organizations upon which it was built—Black Lives Matter, the Dream Defenders, Million Hoodies, Black Youth Project 100, Malcolm X Grassroots Movement, We Charge Genocide, and Black Organizing for Leadership and Dignity (BOLD), among others. We need to support these movements and institutions, financially and by doing the work. And we must defend the political and cultural spaces that enable us to plot, plan, build community and sustain social movements. Here in Los Angeles this means spaces such as the L.A. Black Workers Center, the Labor/Community Strategy Center and its new community space, Strategy and Soul, the L.A. Community Action Network, the Southern California Library for Social Studies and Research, the Community Coalition, and Revolutionary Autonomous Communities, among many others. In New York we can point to Decolonize This Place; in Detroit, the Boggs Center; in St. Louis, Organization for Black Struggle, and so on. There are literally hundreds of centers around the country building for local power, and while none were immune to state surveillance in the past, we can expect heightened monitoring and outright attacks under this extreme right-wing regime. Now is not the time to retreat to our identity silos. We need solidarity more than ever, recognizing that all solidarities are imperfect, often fragile, temporary, and always forged in struggle and sustained through hard work. In our state of emergency, political disagreements, slights, misunderstandings, and microaggressions should not prohibit us from fighting for peoples rights, privileges, and lives.
3. Stop referring to the South as a political backwater, a distinctive site of racist right-wing reaction.
First, white supremacy, homophobia, and anti-union attitudes are national, not regional, problems. Second, black and multiracial groups in the South are at the forefront of resisting Trump’s authoritarian agenda and building power outside the mainstream Democratic Party. Among them are Project South, Southerners on New Ground (SONG), the Moral Mondays Movement, Kindred: Southern Healing Justice Collective, Jackson Rising in Mississippi, Showing Up for Racial Justice (SURJ) in Louisville, Asian Americans Advancing Justice in Atlanta, and the Georgia Latino Alliance for Human Rights.
The frontline battles that preceded Trump’s election must not be abandoned. On the contrary, they need to be strengthened. We must redouble our fight against the Dakota Access Pipeline and support the Standing Rock Sioux Nation’s historic resistance. There is no question that Trump’s election has further empowered the corporation behind the pipeline—the Texas-based Fortune 500 company Energy Transfer Partners—to continue to build no matter what the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers or the Obama Justice Department says. We need to recognize Standing Rock as not only a struggle for environmental justice but an episode in Native people’s five-hundred-year resistance to colonialism. And speaking of colonialism, the crisis in Puerto Rico has not abated—not in the least. As I write, Puerto Ricans on the island and in the U.S. mainland are using every means at their disposal to resist PROMESA, the U.S. plan that empowers a seven-member, unelected board to impose austerity measures as a way of restructuring its debt—measures that include wage reductions, selling off public assets, altering retirement plans for public employees, and fast-tracking changes even if they violate existing laws.
4. Support and deepen the anti-Klan and anti-fascist movement.
We must especially support groups such as Southern Poverty Law Center, which has been on the frontlines of this movement for decades. Although the fight against white supremacist organizations has been continual since the 1860s, the federal government has never successfully outlawed the Klan and similar vigilante groups (although in the 1950s the state of Alabama succeeded in outlawing the NAACP). With Trump’s election we are likely to see a surge in white nationalist and other right-wing terrorism, including attacks on black churches, synagogues, mosques, abortion clinics; and against non-white, queer, and trans people and immigrants. Some on the left will argue that resisting the so-called “alt-right” is a secondary issue since these are fringe movements and building class unity across racial lines ought to be our priority. But with the memory of Colorado Springs and Charleston seared into our memory, this argument rings hollow. And while President Obama’s poignant rendition of “Amazing Grace” at Reverend Clementa Pinckney’s funeral moved much of the nation, the truth is that it is easier to pass laws criminalizing organizations that support the boycott of businesses and institutions complicit in Israel’s illegal occupation of Palestine than it is to outlaw the Ku Klux Klan.
5. Rebuild the labor movement.
As obvious as this may seem, the entire labor movement is under attack on a global scale. Today labor unions are portrayed as corrupt, bloated, a drain on the economy, and modern-day cartels that threaten workers’ “liberty.” Corporations and the CEOs who run them are portrayed as the most efficient and effective mode of organization. In our neoliberal age, emergency financial managers are sent in to replace elected government during real or imagined economic crises; charter schools organized along corporate lines are replacing public schools; universities are being restructured along corporate lines with presidents increasingly functioning like CEOs; and a businessman with a checkered record, a history of improprieties and legal violations and allegations of sexual assault, and no experience whatsoever in government is elected president.
Today’s economic debates focus not on alternatives to capitalism but on what kind of capitalism—capitalism with a safety net for the poor or one driven by extreme free-market liberalization? A capitalism in which the state’s role is to bail out big banks and financial institutions, or one where the state imposes (or rather restores) greater regulation in order to avoid economic crises? In both of these scenarios, a weakened labor movement is a given. The once-powerful unions are doing little more than fighting to restore basic collective bargaining rights and deciding how much they are going to give back. Union leaders are struggling just to participate in crafting austerity measures. In the New Deal era, the state’s efforts to save capitalism centered on Keynesian strategies of massive state expenditures in infrastructure, job creation, a social safety net in the form of direct aid and social security, and certain protections for the right of unions to organize. All these measures were made possible by a strong labor movement. There was a level of militant organization that we did not see in our post-2008 collapse, in spite of Occupy Wall Street. While Occupy was massive, international, and built on preexisting social justice movements, it lacked the kind of institutional power base and political clout that organized labor had in the 1930s. Of course, labor unions have also been powerful engines of racial and gender exclusion, working with capital to impose glass ceilings and racially segmented wages, but the twenty-first-century labor movement has largely embraced principles of social justice, antiracism, immigrant rights, and cross-border strategies.
“I am talking about opening a path to freeing white people from the prison house of whiteness.”
Obviously there is much missing here, like abolishing the Electoral College and continuing to wage a fight for local power in the legislative and electoral arenas as well as in the streets. Local campaigns to raise the minimum wage, for example, have not only produced key victories but served to mobilize people around issues of injustice and inequality. The sites of resistance will become clearer as the political situation becomes more concrete, especially after January 20.
But I want to return to the white working class and how we might break the cycle of “whitelash.” First, we cannot change this country without winning over some portion of white working people, and I am not talking about gaining votes for the Democratic Party. I am talking about opening a path to freeing white people from the prison house of whiteness. True, with whiteness comes privilege, but many of the perceived privileges are inaccessible to most, which then generates resentment. Exposing whiteness for what it is—a foundational myth for the birth and consolidation of capitalism—is fundamental if we are to build a genuine social movement dedicated to dismantling the oppressive regimes of racism, heteropatriarchy, empire, and class exploitation that is at the root of inequality, precarity, materialism, and violence in many forms. I am not suggesting we ignore their grievances, but that we help white working people understand the source of their discontent—real and imagined.
Is this possible? The struggle to recruit the white working class is an old story. Black movement leaders have been trying to free white working people from the paltry wages of whiteness since Reconstruction, at least, and it seems to always end badly. This history is not necessarily legible because we tend to conflate populism and fascism with what Henry Giroux astutely identifies as authoritarianism. Populism is the idea that ordinary people ought to have the power to control their government and their communities, especially along lines that benefit the collective. In the 1880s and ’90s, the black populist movement adopted a vision of a new society based on cooperative economics. The great writer and activist Timothy Thomas Fortune gave their unique vision eloquent voice and plans for action in his book Black and White: Land, Labor and Politics in the South (1884), which offered a path for the emancipation of the nation as a whole, not just black people. He attacked America’s betrayal of Reconstruction, identified monopoly and private ownership of land as the central source of inequality, and articulated a vision of a democratic, caring political economy based on equity and fairness. The National Colored Alliance members had advanced beyond printing more money or demanding free silver, adopting instead a more radical redistribution of wealth and power. They wanted more than a short-term alliance just to raise wages for picking cotton or reducing debt. But Fortune understood that a genuine cooperative commonwealth is not possible unless white workers and farmers join the movement. “The hour is approaching,” he wrote, “when the laboring classes of our country, North, East, West and South, will recognize that they have a common cause, a common humanity and a common enemy; and that, therefore, if they would triumph over wrong and place the laurel wreath upon triumphant justice, without distinction of race or of previous condition they must unite!” Whatever unity they managed to create proved ephemeral. As in so many other scenarios, most whites chose white supremacy over liberation.
The lessons here are crucial. We cannot build a sustainable movement without a paradigm shift. Stopgap, utilitarian alliances to stop Trump aren’t enough. I concur with Giroux, who calls on all of us to wage “an anti-fascist struggle that is not simply about remaking economic structures, but also about refashioning identities, values, and social relations as part of a democratic project that reconfigures what it means to desire a better and more democratic future.” Robin Davis Gibran Kelley is the Gary B. Nash Professor of American History at UCLA. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2870 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The prospect of Donald Trump becoming the next U.S. president and ushering in a period of increased public spending and de-globalisation has not been adequately priced into bond markets, market participants have warned. Trump, currently a candidate for the Republican nomination for U.S. president, could prove disruptive for global markets if he comes into power and brings in policies that match the radical nature of his rhetoric. “I think one big uncertainty that has so far been ignored by the market is Donald Trump: what happens if he is elected,†Patrick Barbe, chief investment officer, European Sovereign & Aggregate, BNP Paribas Investment Partners, told IFR. “We don’t have any specific policies from him yet, but the tone of what he is saying suggests increased wages, expansion of the public sector and rising government expenses; everything that bond markets tend not to like.†While the U.S. markets will be most affected, the repercussions could be felt throughout the world, as the US still accounts for the largest chunk of the world’s GDP; over 22 percent in 2014, according to the World Bank. Trump this week recorded a comprehensive victory in the New York primary, injecting renewed momentum into his campaign to become the Republican nominee. The vote scheduled for November has had a limited effect on bond markets so far. US Treasuries have tended to trade much more on rates expectations than on political risk so far this year, and 10-year UST yields have dropped as much as 36bp since the start of the year to 1.88 percent, according to Eikon prices. Moreover, there has been very little research or analysis done on the subject up to this point, though that is likely to change as the nomination process continues. “I don’t think the market has fully thought through the implications of Trump as U.S. president, but it is definitely moving up the agenda,†said David Riley, head of credit strategy at BlueBay Asset Management. “In my view, populist politics typically is also associated with protectionist economic policies. Certainly a concern would be a more isolationist, protectionist U.S., which would reinforce a fear that, after an era of globalization, we would enter an era of de-globalisation.†ISSUERS FRONT-RUN In the public sector market there has been record levels of US dollar bond issuance this month, partly because SSA issuers are looking to get their borrowing done ahead of any political risk associated with the U.S. election. “Market conditions are primarily driving the issuance as it is looking very solid at the moment, but the U.S. election will cause uncertainty the closer you get to it. A lot of people are getting in ahead of these events,†said one syndicate official who covers public sector debt. There has been $38.9 billion of U.S. dollar bond issuance month-to-date by public sector issuers, according to IFR data, led by the likes of Washington-based supras World Bank and Inter-American Development Bank. With a week still to go, that is comfortably above the US$35bn raised in January | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2871 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: DAPL Employee Plows Into Standing Rock Camp Firing AR-15 Posted on October 28, 2016 DAPL Employee Plows Into Standing Rock Camp Firing AR-15 Share on Twitter Masked with a bandana, he looked at first like a water protector. Papers found in the car showed he was something else: private DAPL security.
Early Friday morning, a man bearing an AR-15 rifle broke through a barricade and sped toward the Oceti Sakowin camp, where thousands are camped out to resist the Dakota Access Pipeline. The Standing Rock Sioux Tribe posted an account of what happened next:
As reported via video evidence from the front lines on 10-27-16. A man berating an assault rifle broke thru a barricade and was speeding toward the Oceti Sakowin camp, he was run off the road 1/4 mile north from the Camp. The man exited the vehicle where he appeared to be disguised as a water protector. He than fired several shots from his assault rifle. Tribal Law Enforcement responded, the man was than apprehended. Insurance Documents from the vehicle reveal that it is owned by Dakota Access Pipeline. We commend the BIA Law Enforcement to their commitment of public safety and for their quick response and apprehension of the suspect who was clearly meanings to do harm.
The insurance documents also name Thompson-Gray LLC; according to its website, Thompson-Gray LLC provides “programmatic, financial, as well as information technology support” to the Department of Defense. Clients include the U.S. Army Threat Systems Management Office, the North Carolina National Guard, and the Alabama National Guard.
See more photos in the embedded posts below: | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2872 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: It was appalling but not exactly surprising to see the way Republicans responded to the sudden death of Supreme Court Justice Antonin Scalia. The party that has increasingly defined itself solely on its opposition to President Obama once again immediately declared that they would not allow him to fulfill his constitutional obligations of appointing a new Justice.Obama, no doubt tired of this obstructionism after seven long years of it, basically told them to shove it. He would be nominating a justice whether they liked it or not.However, in the coverage of this potentially era-defining new appointment, CNN managed to stick its foot so far into its mouth that it s a wonder they didn t just cut to commercial and never come back.Dana Bash was discussing the Republican opposition to a new nominee appointed by President Obama and in her rush to be fair to both sides, she wound up feeding right into the right-wing talking points that serious journalists might scoff at. When asked about President Obama s decision to go ahead with a nomination, Bash remarked:That s right. And as we were talking about last hour, that is not surprising in the least, since he clearly feels that it is his constitutional duty to do so. That he is the President of the United States. It is his job to nominate somebody.He clearly feels it s his constitutional duty? What? It is his constitutional duty to appoint new justices. That s put in simple terms in Constitution itself. Saying this is Obama s opinion is disingenuous. But Bash was only just warming up:He still will be technically the president of the United States for the next 11 months, which is a very, very long time. Yes, we are in an election year, but we are barely into this election year of 2016. So you have Republicans coming back, not just Mitch McConnell who you just mentioned, but the Republican chairman of the Senate Judiciary Committee saying that he believes that it is standard practice to not deal with such issues in an election year. Technically he will be president of the United States. Technically. You might want to tell that to the people who voted for him for a full four year term.Needless to say, the internet was not pleased. CNN may have wanted to avoid offending conservatives, but they managed to offend nearly everyone else. He still will be technically the pres. of the US for another 11 months. CNN. Technically? John Aravosis (@aravosis) February 14, 2016I'll accept this definition if CNN's talking heads state that they're "technically" reporters. https://t.co/piXBmK9ATS Ferrett Steinmetz (@ferretthimself) February 14, 2016Did CNN actually say Technically President? Did they really? https://t.co/uEnXN74OSU Anthony (@ThatWeirdGuy77) February 14, 2016Hey @CNN he's not TECHNICALLY the President, he's ACTUALLY the President. Stop parroting right wing stupidity. Ben Cisco (@BenCisco) February 14, 2016The issue wasn t just a slip of the tongue, it was that CNN was pretending that the Republican beef with Obama s nomination had to do with anything other than political point scoring. For many years, the policy of mainstream media outlets has been to tread lightly on partisan issues to avoid alienating viewers. This might help keep ratings up, but it s not a way to accurately report the news. There are times when things are just WRONG.In the case of Republicans now saying Obama can t appoint a justice because it is an election year, history and the law say otherwise. It s time for reporters to own that.By contrast, debate moderator John Dickerson stood up to Sen. Ted Cruz when he tried to flat-out lie about Supreme Court appointments. Asked to back up his claims with facts, Cruz was left speechless, the Republican audience booed Dickerson, but the American people were informed. It was a highlight of the election.Feature image via YouTube | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2873 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Ukrainian member of parliament claimed that Ukraine allegedly “lost half of its GDP because of Western sanctions against Russia". Russia sanctions “first and foremost took away the incomes of our citizens. We (Ukraine) lost half of our GDP, Russia lost 2%, Europe less than 1%, and we – half”. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2874 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The leftist teachers and the press are part of the HUGE problem of misinformation about Donald Trump. They are partly to blame for the violence and hate out there. Here s a perfect example: A self-described mentor for the girl who attacked Jade urged compassion for the suspended student. We don t want a mistake during a highly emotional and intense time to affect her long-term future, said Khabral Muhammad, a life coach at Live in Peace, a nonprofit group supporting East Palo Alto youth. WOODSIDE, Calif. One Peninsula high school student s support of Donald Trump may have made her a target.The Woodside High School student and her family are shocked something like this could happen. The girl said all of her friends were posting about the election last night, but her post got her beat up.Cellphone video captured the moment a female student attacked sophomore Jade Armenio. This girl comes up to me and she said, Do you hate Mexicans? and I was like, no, and she said, You support Trump. You hate Mexicans.' Armenio says the girl hit her, threw her to the ground, pulled out her earrings and hair. She was left with a bloody nose and scratches and bruises. Before the results came in on election night, Armenio had posted on Instagram that she hoped Trump would win. I don t think I could name one person on any of my accounts who didn t say their opinion last night, Armenio said.Armenio s parents say they re mortified about what happened. My husband and I don t put our political views on social media. Kids still do it. That s their life. We tell them don t do it, but even if she does she should never be hit like that, said Gina Armenio.The principle of Woodside High School issued a statement that reads in part the recorded incident was investigated in conjunction with law enforcement and appropriate disciplinary action has been taken.Armenio says she s also now the target of social media hate mail but she s taking it in stride. In high school if you really care about what every person thinks you re going to get torn apart, Armenio said.Armenio parents say they are keeping her out of school until they know she ll be safe.If only this poor pro-Trump child had just worn #safetypins perhaps this wouldn't have happened pic.twitter.com/w07rO9OOo2 ia?GiveMeTears? (@nia4_trump) November 12, 2016 | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2875 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did the Taliban Endorse Trump While Scientific Community Endorsed Biden? Claim summaries: A popular tweet used a shaky comparison to differentiate the U.S. presidential candidates in 2020.
contextual information: Voting in the 2020 U.S. Election may be over, but misinformation continues to spread. Never stop fact-checking. Follow our post-election coverage here. As the 2020 U.S. presidential election inched closer, the internet was flooded with misleading memes about both candidates, including the allegation that extremist organizations like the Taliban and Ku Klux Klan supported U.S. President Donald Trump, while the New England Journal of Medicine (NEJM) and other bipartisan groups openly endorsed Democratic candidate Joe Biden. The claims were first put forth by screenwriter and author Bess Kalb, whose work has been featured on "Jimmy Kimmel Live!" and in The New Yorker. In a Twitter post shared on Oct. 11, she suggested that extremist groups supported Trump while implying that more even-keeled organizations backed Biden. At the time of publication, the tweet had received more than 370,000 likes. Although Kalb didn't specify in the tweet which candidate received endorsements from whom, it was perfectly clear to anyone following news about the presidential campaigns at the time which was which: Biden's endorsers included the magazine Scientific American, and the Trump campaign had publicly rejected an alleged endorsement from the Taliban. To verify Kalb's claim, we broke it down into four sections to address each of her assertions. Like much viral content, her statement contained kernels of truth that had been taken out of context or were inaccurately represented. In October 2020, CBS News claimed to have spoken with Zubihullah Mujahid, a spokesperson for the Islamic Emirate of Afghanistan, or Taliban, who allegedly told the publication that the extremist group believed Trump would win the November 2020 election. In an exclusive telephone interview, Mujahid reportedly said that Trump had "proved himself a politician who accomplished all the major promises he had made to the American people." Another senior Taliban leader said that the organization hoped Trump would win the election and end U.S. military presence in Afghanistan. CBS News added that the Taliban's enthusiasm for Trump is grounded in the shared goal of getting U.S. troops out of Afghanistan after 19 years of war—a longtime promise of the president. However, Mujahid denied the claims made by CBS News and wrote in an Oct. 10 tweet that the publication had misinterpreted his remarks. A subsequently translated tweet shared as a comment added that nothing like what they published had happened. Tim Murtaugh, a spokesperson for the Trump campaign, told Axios in an emailed statement, "We reject their support, and the Taliban should know that the President will always protect American interests by any means necessary, unlike Joe Biden, who opposed taking out Osama bin Laden and Qasem Soleimani." In an Oct. 10 tweet, Murtaugh added that he had told CBS News that the Trump campaign rejected the endorsement. Snopes attempted to contact Murtaugh on Twitter but did not receive a response in time for publication. Our message to the Trump campaign also went unanswered. At the announcement of Trump's 2016 bid, the KKK published a full-page spread supporting Trump in its official quarterly newspaper, The Crusader. In an interview with MSNBC, Trump stated that he disavowed former KKK leader David Duke and that his campaign rejected the endorsement, issuing the following statement to news outlets in 2016: "Mr. Trump and the campaign denounce hate in any form. This publication is repulsive, and their views do not represent the tens of millions of Americans who are uniting behind our campaign." The KKK endorsement followed the Trump presidency for years. It resurfaced again in January 2020 when a manipulated photo claimed to show a group of KKK members marching behind a campaign sign for Trump and Vice President Mike Pence. A message accompanying the meme at the time claimed, "This is all you need to know about why you should vote Blue in 2020." As our previous fact check concluded, the photograph in question was not genuine—it was taken during a march in Pulaski, Tennessee, in July 2009. The banner actually read, "Fraternal White Knights of the Ku Klux Klan." White supremacist and former Grand Wizard David Duke, whose Twitter account was suspended in October 2020, has expressed support for Trump on more than one occasion. In a video shared to Twitter by verified photojournalist Mykal McEldowney of the Indy Star (which has been archived here) from the Aug. 12, 2017, Unite the Right rally in Charlottesville, Virginia, the former KKK leader offered support to the president. "We're going to fulfill the promises of Donald Trump. That's what we believed in. That's why we voted for Donald Trump—because he said he's going to take our country back. And that's what we had to do." Trump expressed disapproval of Duke and disavowed white supremacy on "Good Morning America" in 2016. During a televised debate on Sept. 29, 2020, the president was asked to clearly and explicitly condemn white supremacy, which he failed to do on that occasion, though he did condemn "all white supremacists," mentioning the KKK specifically, during a Fox News interview two days later. NEJM, an esteemed medical journal that publishes research and review articles, took an unprecedented step when it published an Oct. 8 editorial urging voters to render judgment on the current political leaders, adding that they were dangerously incompetent in their handling of the pandemic. The column, titled "Dying in a Leadership Vacuum," did not explicitly name Trump, nor did it acknowledge Biden. Rather, it laid blame on a failing leadership and administration that inadequately responded to the COVID-19 pandemic, further polarizing and politicizing Americans while disenfranchising vulnerable communities and leaving behind healthcare professionals who have put their lives on the line. By making masks political tools rather than effective infection control measures, continuing to push inaccurate guidelines, and deferring to pandemic responses at the state level—many of which did not have adequate resources to fight such a public health crisis without the support of the federal government—the publication argued that U.S. leaders ignored and even denigrated experts, furthering that the COVID-19 response was a failure that had taken a crisis and turned it into a tragedy. The editorial went on to say the following: "The response of our nation's leaders has been consistently inadequate. The federal government has largely abandoned disease control to the states. Governors have varied in their responses, not so much by party as by competence. But whatever their competence, governors do not have the tools that Washington controls. Instead of using those tools, the federal government has undermined them. The Centers for Disease Control and Prevention, which was the world's leading disease response organization, has been eviscerated and has suffered dramatic testing and policy failures. The National Institutes of Health have played a key role in vaccine development but have been excluded from much crucial government decision-making. And the Food and Drug Administration has been shamefully politicized, appearing to respond to pressure from the administration rather than scientific evidence. Our current leaders have undercut trust in science and in government, causing damage that will certainly outlast them. Instead of relying on expertise, the administration has turned to uninformed opinion leaders and charlatans who obscure the truth and facilitate the promulgation of outright lies. Anyone else who recklessly squandered lives and money in this way would be suffering legal consequences. Our leaders have largely claimed immunity for their actions. But this election gives us the power to render judgment. Reasonable people will certainly disagree about the many political positions taken by candidates. But truth is neither liberal nor conservative. When it comes to the response to the largest public health crisis of our time, our current political leaders have demonstrated that they are dangerously incompetent. We should not abet them and enable the deaths of thousands more Americans by allowing them to keep their jobs." It is unclear what broad bipartisan coalition Kalb refers to in her tweet; however, both candidates indeed have a long list of endorsements from both sides of the political aisle. Most notably, in mid-September, Scientific American backed Biden, marking it the second publication to break stride in endorsing a presidential candidate for the first time in its history. Again, the editorial board cited Trump's rejection of science and pandemic response as a catalyst. "The evidence and the science show that Donald Trump has badly damaged the U.S. and its people—because he rejects evidence and science. The most devastating example is his dishonest and inept response to the COVID-19 pandemic, which cost more than 190,000 Americans their lives by the middle of September," wrote the publication. "He has also attacked environmental protections, medical care, and the researchers and public science agencies that help this country prepare for its greatest challenges. That is why we urge you to vote for Joe Biden, who is offering fact-based plans to protect our health, our economy, and the environment. These and other proposals he has put forth can set the country back on course for a safer, more prosperous, and more equitable future." A list of endorsements from political leaders and labor unions can be found on Biden's official campaign website, but as with most political candidates, the majority of his endorsers are partisan. Those include activist groups built around the platforms of LGBTQ rights, environmental issues, animal rights, women's reproductive rights, and labor unions representing dozens of industries from across the nation. That being said, a number of established newspapers have also endorsed the former vice president, including The Washington Post, The New York Times, and The Boston Globe. By comparison, Trump is backed by activist groups that include religious organizations, law enforcement, and pro-life organizations. Trump has been endorsed by a handful of publications, including The Boston Herald and The Tulsa Beacon. In the weeks leading up to the general election in 2020, discord and contention dominated U.S. political discourse. As with many viral and political posts, memes, videos, or content, elements of truth are not fully represented in a short character count. Generally speaking, this claim was based in truth but lacked the context needed to accurately characterize both the Trump and Biden campaigns. | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2876 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Most recent environmental concerns regarding pollution have been largely focused on water and land pollution. Though these are undeniably major concerns facing our planet, there has been a tendency... | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2877 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: When Donald J. Trump made an appearance this spring at the New York Military Academy, his high school alma mater in he spoke of it with gratitude and in glowing terms, describing it as “one of the really great military academies. †“I had such incredible experiences here,†Mr. Trump told a crowd during a campaign stop in April. But six years ago, when it was on the verge of closing under the weight of debt, and a small group from the school came to Trump Tower seeking financial assistance, Mr. Trump gave a swift and firm response: No. “We were disappointed,†said Rich Pezzullo, an alumnus who attended the meeting, which took place as Mr. Trump was participating in an online real estate auction and ended when the winner of his Miss USA pageant showed up. “We thought he’d open up his checkbook,†Mr. Pezzullo said. Over the years, Mr. Trump has billed himself as an “ardent philanthropist,†and his official biography says that he is “involved with numerous civic and charitable organizations. †But the depiction of Mr. Trump as a generous benefactor has recently come into question amid a series of reports raising doubts about whether he has followed through on his lavish pledges, whether he misused the foundation that bears his name and whether he financially supports it at all. Interviews with people who have worked with or solicited money from him, as well as years of publicly available charity records, paint a picture of Mr. Trump as a reluctant giver despite his wealth. Donations from his foundation, which in recent years has been exclusively financed by others, sometimes served his own needs while helping the recipients. Jack O’Donnell, who was president and chief operating officer of Trump Plaza Hotel Casino in the late 1980s, said Mr. Trump would question the need for donations, even those as small as a couple thousand dollars. “He’d say ‘Why are we doing this?’ or ‘Do we have to give this much?’ †said Mr. O’Donnell, who parted ways with Mr. Trump on bad terms and was described by the Trump campaign as a disgruntled former employee. “I don’t know how else to put it: He’s cheap. †Mr. Trump’s philanthropic endeavors over the past four decades have been dotted with pledges to donate the proceeds from books or speeches. Sometimes, Mr. Trump has stepped in to help a person in need, with the cameras rolling. And Mr. Trump, usually accompanied by his wife, Melania, has been a familiar face at benefit galas in New York and Florida, where the rich and famous mingle and are seen. He has also more quietly supported other causes over the years. He has donated to and sits on the board of the Police Athletic League, a youth sports organization in New York. And Mr. Trump has won a lifetime achievement award from the American Cancer Society for his giving. “At the end of the day, in my narrow world, he’s a board member who has consistently contributed to us,†said Frederick Watts, the executive director of the Police Athletic League. Mr. Trump’s campaign, in response to questions about his giving practices, called him “extremely generous with both his time and his money. †“Mr. Trump regularly makes personal contributions to worthy charitable causes and organizations, but does not seek recognition,†his spokeswoman, Hope Hicks, said in an email. “Mr. Trump has made several significant contributions to the Trump Foundation, including an initial lump sum at its inception. Since then he has made personal contributions, and regularly waives fees for appearances, speeches and publicity rights instead encouraging the donations be made to charity. †In 1987 Mr. Trump started the Donald J. Trump Foundation, a nonprofit through which his own donations and those of others are channeled to causes and institutions. Through 2014, according to the foundation’s tax filings, he had donated $5. 4 million to the foundation, a small fraction of his net worth of billions of dollars. Mr. Trump and his aides say that in addition to what the foundation gives, he writes personal checks directly to charities. His personal tax returns would reveal his deductions for charitable giving, but he has refused to release those returns. Hillary and Bill Clinton’s returns show deductions for $23 million in donations since 2001, about 10 percent of their income. A series of reports in recent weeks, most notably in The Washington Post, have revealed that Mr. Trump has stopped giving money to his own foundation in recent years. Instead, the foundation has been relying exclusively on the donations of others. Mr. Trump has then given that money away, sometimes claiming credit for these donations. The Post also reported that it had not been able to turn up evidence that Mr. Trump had delivered on most of his pledges to donate income from speeches and books. Mr. Trump has also used the foundation’s money in questionable ways, including a donation to a political action committee aligned with the attorney general of Florida while she was considering whether to bring legal action against his Trump University. That led to a $2, 500 penalty by the Internal Revenue Service for improperly using the foundation for political purposes. The Trump campaign has called the $25, 000 donation a clerical error. The Post also reported this week that two donations totaling $258, 000 had been made from the foundation to settle legal disputes involving Mr. Trump’s businesses. “This story was not accurate,†Ms. Hicks said in a statement. The attorney general of New York is currently investigating how the foundation’s money is spent neither Mr. Trump nor the foundation have been charged or penalized for any wrongdoing beyond the $2, 500. Other donations have been directed to organizations aligned with Mr. Trump’s politics. The foundation contributed $100, 000 to support Citizens United, the conservative watchdog group that, among other things, has sued for access to records from Mrs. Clinton’s State Department. The foundation also gave $25, 000 to a foundation affiliated with the conservative monthly The American Spectator. (Neither recipient was a political action committee.) Foundation tax records for 2014 illustrate how Mr. Trump has recently used its money. The Citizens United gift was the largest donation. The foundation gave $50, 000 each to the Leukemia and Lymphoma Society in West Palm Beach, and to the private school his son Barron attends. Four other charities — the Police Athletic League, two health organizations and the League — received about $100, 000 between them, and a collection of other groups received smaller grants totaling about $200, 000. His high school alma mater received roughly $30, 000 from the foundation over the years, but those contributions ended in 2005. When the academy contingent — which included Theodore Dobias, a former coach and administrator at the academy whom Mr. Trump has described as a major influence in his life — came by his office in 2010, Mr. Trump made clear that he did not view the school as a worthwhile investment given its dire financial straits, Mr. Pezzullo, the alumnus, said. The school would eventually declare bankruptcy and was close to closing before an investor bought it at auction last year. Even when donations were effectively made with other people’s money, Mr. Trump sometimes received the attention. In 2012, his foundation made a $10, 000 contribution to the charitable arm of the Florida Association of the American Institute of Architects as part of its 100th anniversary. The group had solicited the owners of Florida buildings it highlighted as great architecture, including Mr. Trump’s estate in Palm Beach, which was honored as the top historic structure in the state. In return for their donations, the owners “got great publicity,†said Vicki Long, the association’s vice president and chief executive. The same year, foundation tax records show, it gave $50, 000 to the Child Mind Institute in New York, which bought Mr. Trump and his wife seats at the organization’s gala dinner. They also attended a gala for Operation Smile, a nonprofit that treats cleft palates and lips, and to which the foundation gave $100, 000. Mr. Trump’s meshing of charity and publicity goes back decades, including an episode in 1986 when he helped a Georgia widow save her farm from foreclosure. After the woman’s husband had committed suicide, Mr. Trump solicited donations on her behalf and made one of his own. When their goal was reached, he held a news conference at Trump Tower at which the widow did a symbolic burning of the mortgage papers. Frank Argenbright, an Atlanta businessman who was part of the effort, recalled Mr. Trump paying great attention to the details of the event, including what cigarette lighter to use. “He said ‘I don’t want to go down there in front of the cameras and not have it work,’ †Mr. Argenbright said. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2878 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: A backlash of epic proportions ensued after Donald Trump launched a war against African-American athletes who protest by kneeling during the national anthem. The former reality show star has managed to piss off players in three major professional sports and even went so far as to call Colin Kaepernick s mother a bitch. And even this morning, the 71-year-old man crawled out of bed to rant and rage on his Twitter timeline again about black athletes silently protesting. The backlash has been fierce, with the Pittsburgh Steelers announcing that they plan to stay in their locker room for the national anthem before their game against the Chicago Bears. Multiple team members from the Ravens and Jaguars took to their knees during the anthem while the remaining players stood behind them linking arms in solidarity.The Dolphins are wearing #ImWithKap t-shirts.The Dolphins have shirts showing their support for Colin Kaepernick's push for social justice and racial equality. pic.twitter.com/OMha2xl0wj Omar Kelly (@OmarKelly) September 24, 2017 Over 500 players have communicated to me that they intend on demonstrating today, activist and writer Shaun King tweeted.Over 500 players have communicated to me that they intend on demonstrating today. Shaun King (@ShaunKing) September 24, 2017There are 14 games that will be played today, with protesting athletes totaling at least one-third of all the players.Former NFL head coach Rex Ryan, a Trump supporter who endorsed the former reality show star during the campaign last year because he says what s on his mind now says that he s appalled and pissed off at Trump over his remarks against black NFL athletes.Former NFL Commissioner Paul Tagilabue called Trump s comments on NFL players insulting and disgraceful and added that we re not entitled to shut anybody s speech down. Trump blasted the NFL this morning over its ratings but he failed to mention his own. Trump s approval numbers are the lowest of any president in the history of polling.To kneel during the national anthem is not a sign of disrespect toward our country s flag. It is actually respecting what the flag truly stands for and the rights we have as citizens of this country. Ignoring racism is disrespecting the flag.Featured image via Scott Olson/Getty Images. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2879 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: 300,000 Wisconsin Voters 'Turned Away' Due to Voter ID Laws? Claim summaries: According to a viral tweet, hundreds of thousands of voters were turned away from the polls in a close Wisconsin race because they did not have voter identification.
contextual information: On 10 November 2016, journalist Dan Arel published a tweet claiming that Donald Trump had won the state of Wisconsin by 27,000 votes, adding that 300,000 Wisconsin voters were "turned away" by the state's voter identification laws. Trump won Wisconsin by 27,000 votes; 300,000 voters were turned away by the state's strict Voter ID law. There is your "rigged" election. Many social media users sought citations for both claims (one involving the margin of Trump's Wisconsin victory and the other the number of voters purportedly turned away). As of 14 November 2016, Trump's votes in Wisconsin were tallied at 1,409,427 to Hillary Clinton's 1,382,210 (a margin of 27,257 votes). That figure made it into a New York Times article about voter identification laws and their effects on voting outcomes, but the far more attention-grabbing claim of 300,000 voters being denied at the polls did not receive the same scrutiny. When asked about a source for those numbers, Arel tweeted: "Not sure if I replied to you or not yet." The article Arel cited claimed that we will likely never know how many people were kept from the polls by restrictions like voter ID laws, cuts to early voting, and barriers to voter registration. However, this should have been a question that many more people were investigating. For example, 27,000 votes currently separate Trump and Clinton in Wisconsin, where 300,000 registered voters, according to a federal court, lacked strict forms of voter ID. Voter turnout in Wisconsin was at its lowest levels in 20 years and decreased by 13 percent in Milwaukee, where 70 percent of the state's African-American population lives, according to Daniel Nichanian of the University of Chicago. I documented stories of voters in Wisconsin, including a 99-year-old man who made two trips to the polls and one to the DMV on Election Day just to be able to vote, while others decided not to vote at all because they were denied IDs. The piece linked to a 29 September 2016 article on the same website about the difficulty of obtaining voter identification in Wisconsin, but nowhere in that article did the 300,000 number appear. A second link led to a 29 April 2014 Wisconsin court ruling against voter ID laws. For the reasons stated, it was ordered that the named defendants and their officers, agents, servants, employees, and attorneys, and all those acting in concert or participation with them, or having actual or implicit knowledge of this order by personal service or otherwise, were hereby permanently enjoined from conditioning a person's access to a ballot, either in person or absentee, on that person's presenting a form of photo identification. A section of that ruling gauged that roughly 300,000 registered voters in Wisconsin did not possess sufficient identification to vote at the time that the ruling was issued in April 2014, but it did not suggest that all 300,000 had tried and failed to vote at any point. In light of the fact that a substantial number of the 300,000-plus voters who lack an ID are low income, Act 23's burdens must be assessed with reference to them rather than with reference to a typical middle- or upper-class voter. Although the latter voter may have little trouble obtaining an ID, he or she is not the type of voter who will need to obtain one in order to comply with Act 23. Thus, in the discussion that follows, I identify the burdens associated with obtaining a qualifying photo ID and explain how they will impact low-income voters. Given the obstacles identified above, it is likely that a substantial number of the 300,000-plus voters who lack a qualifying ID will be deterred from voting. Although not every voter will face all of these obstacles, many voters will face some of them, particularly those who are low income. The evidence at trial showed that even small obstacles will be enough to deter many individuals who lack an ID from voting. The courts found not that 300,000 people were actively "turned away" as of April 2014, but rather that that number of registered voters possibly faced what the court deemed to be undue burdens in obtaining the necessary identification to vote. There is no way to determine exactly how many people Act 23 will prevent or deter from voting without considering the individual circumstances of each of the | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2880 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: After a summer filled with flaming rockets and an earth-shaking nuclear blast, North Korea s state media is portraying Kim Jong Un as a leader who has temporarily traded weapons for workshops. The new portrayal appears designed to build domestic support by delivering on promises to develop the economy alongside the nuclear program and to reassure citizens amid tightening international sanctions. State media photos released on Wednesday showed Kim examining equipment at a tractor factory, test driving one of the vehicles and laughing with workers, the latest in a stream of photos in the past two months depicting a smiling Kim visiting farms and factories that make shoes, cosmetics, trucks. Between June 21 and Sept. 20, Kim did not conduct a single public activity related to the economy, instead focusing almost exclusively on appearances at events including missile tests or tours of weapons factories, according to data collected by South Korea s Ministry of Unification. The resumption of public, economic-related activities has coincided with a lull in missile testing. North Korea has not fired a rocket or tested a nuclear weapon since it launched a ballistic missile over Japan on Sept. 15. The break in testing matches lulls at similar times in past years and North Korea is almost certainly continuing its push for more capable nuclear weapons, South Korean officials say. But the renewed focus on economic development could be a bid to unify North Koreans and strengthen support for the leadership, said Baik Tae-hyun, a spokesman for South Korea s Unification Ministry. While North Korea still shows the will to continue developing its nuclear and missile program, their focus on the economy is also helping the North Korean people come together, Baik said. North Korea may be starting to feel the pinch of sanctions, tightened after its sixth and most powerful nuclear test in September, and its leadership could be under pressure to limit their impact, said Nam Sung-wook, a professor of North Korean studies at Korea University in Seoul. Kim Jong Un has been simply doing what he does best | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2881 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Trump Vows to 'Get Rid of the Library of Congress' Claim summaries: A fake news article reported that Republican presidential candidate Donald Trump had promised to shut down the Library of Congress as a cost-saving measure.
contextual information: In June 2016, a message reporting that GOP candidate Donald Trump was planning on shutting down the Library of Congress as a cost-saving measure if elected president began circulating via Facebook: Such messages linked to a story that was originally posted on The Retroset web site: As reported early this morning by CNN and HuffPost, Donald Trump, in a phone interview with Fox News Steve Doocy, claimed as President of the United States, he would seek to cut-out all unnecessary spending. When pressed for specifics, the GOP frontrunner dismissively quipped, Well, I think we spend way too much on organizations and departments that just save stuff. For instance, Id make a move to get rid of the Library of Congress. Trump continued, Yknow what? Old books, decomposing newspapers, pansy artwork and a bunch of black and white movies about women and illegal immigrants have no business being protected with our hard-earned tax dollars. My first act as President would be to dissolve wasteful branches of government like the Library and that Kennedy Center for Peforming Arts stuff, and sell the material to China for huge profits. The publication date of the Retroset article wasn't obvious to those who encountered it via Facebook, but readers who clicked through to the original discovered that it appeared on 1 April 2016, otherwise known as April Fool's Day. original The Retroset didn't specifically state that the article was a springtime ruse, but the text incorporated several clues to its fictional nature. For instance, while The Retroset reported that CNN and the Huffington Post had both reported on Trump's plan to shutter the Library of Congress, the embedded links they provided led to irrelevant articles on those sites. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2882 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: German Foreign Minister Sigmar Gabriel on Saturday denied a report that said the Social Democrat, whose party has agreed to enter talks with Chancellor Angela Merkel s conservatives on forming a coalition, was eyeing the post of finance minister. News magazine Der Spiegel reported that Gabriel had recently told senior members of his SPD party that he was interested in becoming German finance minister if the SPD agreed to a re-run of the current grand coalition with Merkel s conservatives. What Spiegel is writing is sheer nonsense, Gabriel told Deutschlandfunk radio. I m in a caretaker government and no one knows what the next government will look like. More than two months after a national election, Germany has not managed to form a new government, so the conservative coalition from the last legislative period is still in power. Merkel, who lost many supporters to the far-right in September s election, is banking on the SPD to extend her 12-year tenure after attempts to cobble together an awkward three-way alliance with the liberal Free Democrats and environmentalist Greens crumbled. If the SPD were to agree to another grand coalition | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2883 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: German Chancellor Angela Merkel faced pressure at the weekend to embrace ideas by French President Emmanuel Macron in a passionate appeal for closer European cooperation and push back in looming coalition talks against parties critical of them. Merkel has praised a speech Macron gave in Paris last week, in which he urged European countries, shaken by years of financial crisis and Britain s Brexit vote, to press ahead with closer integration by harmonizing their asylum, defense and economic policies. But weakened by the worst election result for her conservatives since 1949 and forced into difficult coalition negotiations that could drag on for months, she must convince potential partners like the Free Democrats (FDP), who have been critical of Macron s European ideas, to compromise with France. Some German media expressed concern at the weekend about whether Merkel would be prepared to set aside her cautious instincts and take the political risks at home that may be necessary for Berlin to meet Macron halfway. They contrasted Macron s rousing speech and staunchly pro-European campaign with Merkel s passive re-election race, in which she barely mentioned Europe and was criticized by other parties for avoiding serious discussion about the challenges facing Germany. Merkel cannot hide behind the FDP. She can t use their euroskepticism as an excuse to rebuff Macron, German weekly Der Spiegel said in an editorial. She realizes what an impression Macron made in Germany by speaking passionately about his European ideas, said the Sueddeutsche Zeitung newspaper. And she knows that the absence of fervent speeches like this has left a vacuum in Germany for which she is to blame. The criticism came as the FDP appeared to soften its tone ahead of coalition talks with Merkel s conservatives and the pro-European Greens. In an interview with the Bild am Sonntag (BAMS) newspaper, FDP leader Christian Lindner called Macron a godsend and echoed his language about the need to focus on a common vision, rather than get bogged down in areas of disagreement. We should not focus on red lines, but rather on common horizons, Lindner said when asked about Macron s calls for deeper euro zone integration, an area the FDP views with scepticism. Macron is a godsend. More cooperation in crime fighting, the military, asylum, energy and digital is within reach, added Lindner, who is seen as a top candidate to replace Wolfgang Schaeuble as finance minister, a position with major influence over European policy. His comments came days after the number two figure in the party, Wolfgang Kubicki, described Macron s speech as sensational and voiced support for his ideas for a common army and asylum policy. But both Lindner and Kubicki made clear that they remain skeptical about Macron s proposals to create a separate budget and finance minister for the 19-nation single currency bloc. At a summit of EU leaders in Tallinn last week, Merkel said her top priorities were to move forward on the creation of a single digital market and a common asylum policy in the EU. Only after that, she said, should the bloc tackle the controversial issue of euro zone reform. Germany has two overarching challenges now: to give a broad vision of where it wants to go in Europe and to formulate what will give to get there, Daniela Schwarzer, research director at the German Council on Foreign Relations, told Reuters. Macron has spelled out sacrifices. Now it is up to Germany. And above all it is up to Merkel to take the lead, to say what she wants. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2884 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: No, Sean Connery's Net Worth Didn't Leave Family 'in Tears' Claim summaries: We recently saw the same misleading advertising network "arbitrage" ploy about a celebrity's net worth used on "Jeopardy" game show host Alex Trebek.
contextual information: Known as a famous Hollywood actor and one of the original men to portray the iconic character James Bond, Sean Connery died on Oct. 31, 2020. According to TMZ, he passed away at 1:30 a.m. "at his home in the Bahamas." TMZ reported that Connery died in his sleep from pneumonia, heart failure, and old age, according to his death certificate. The certificate shows he died from respiratory failure as a result of pneumonia, old age, and atrial fibrillation—an irregular heart rate that can increase the risk of strokes, heart failure, and other heart-related complications. Entertainment Tonight contacted the family, reporting that "Connery's wife, Micheline Roquebrune, and his two sons, Jason and Stephane, told ET that he died peacefully in his sleep, surrounded by family." Following his death, at least one advertiser purchased ad space on the social media platform Reddit or on a mobile app that displays Reddit content. The ad read: "sean connery's Net Worth Left His Family In Tears." Connery's name was in lowercase, likely because the "Net Worth Left His Family In Tears" part is a template. It's not true; it's fabricated and completely baseless. Sean Connery's family was not left "in tears" because of his net worth. The advertisement in question appeared to lead to Life Exact, a viral content website. It was first documented by Reddit user JezCon. It's unclear if the advertisement is still active on the website. We were unable to locate the ad, but it likely led to a slideshow with multiple pages, where the idea was to make more money on the advertisements displayed during the slideshow than it cost to run the original ad alongside Reddit content. This is known as advertising "arbitrage." Business and technology blog Margins, managed by Ranjan Roy and Can Duruk, defines "arbitrage" as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." He also called it "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist." Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with many pages. The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it cost to show the initial ad that lured them to it. Feel free to submit ads to us, and be sure to include a screenshot of the ad and the link to where the ad leads. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2885 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: No, not the number of primaries he’s won, or the number of votes he’s gotten, or the number of delegates he has. I mean the poll numbers that show the Ohio governor is well ahead of Hillary Clinton in a November matchup, while she beats mogul Donald Trump and Sen. Ted Cruz. There’s even one that shows him dead even with Clinton in the deep, deep-blue state of New Jersey. Isn’t that exactly the kind of candidate delegates would and should turn to if they become unbound after the first ballot? Well, that’s his argument anyway.
Sorry, Gov. Kasich, but history says you’re wrong. And there may be good reasons why the “I’m electable†argument is less potent than it might appear.
For party delegates deciding how much “electability†matters, it’s important to remember that such springtime numbers have a fragile half-life. As Trump’s supporters keep reminding us, Ronald Reagan was running anywhere from 18 to 23 points behind President Jimmy Carter in the spring of 1980. One reason ex-President Gerald Ford flirted with entering the race—apart from a grudge from 1976—was that, as Time magazine noted at the time, “Ford shares the fears of many Republicans that Reagan cannot win if the Democrats re-nominate Jimmy Carter.â€
Then in 1992, even as Bill Clinton was firming his grip on the nomination, the polls told a dismal story about his prospective election. In June, he was running third behind President George H.W. Bush and—in first place—Texas businessman Ross Perot. (Note: Springtime polls often elevate independent candidates—in 1980, John Anderson was running as high as 24 per cent against Carter and Reagan.) So there’s reason for Republicans looking at Kasich to be skeptical about these numbers.
Even if the numbers are sound, there’s a reason that they might spell out the wrong strategy for the campaign: "Electability" isn't the message that galvanizes a party base, and for good reason.
In 2000, every survey showed that Sen. John McCain would run far better against Vice President Al Gore than did George W. Bush. Around the time of New Hampshire, McCain had an 8-point lead, while Bush and Gore ran even.
But McCain was a heretic. He opposed the mammoth tax cuts proposed by Bush and congressional Republicans, preferring to see some of the surplus—yes, there was a surplus back then—go toward reducing the debt. And he’d teamed up with Sen. Russ Feingold, the most liberal Democrat in the Senate, to write a bill banning most soft money from campaigns (this was the law ultimately eviscerated by the Supreme Court).
That’s one of the reasons McCain won Republican voters only in New Hampshire and in his home state of Arizona. His margins elsewhere came from independents. For Republicans, he did not represent them as well as Bush did.
And that goes to the heart of the issue. A party is more than a collection of individuals looking for an appealing candidate: It's an organization searching for the person who the best embodies their beliefs. When the party faithful—the people who are delegates—pull the lever, they're going to be thinking about what kind of Republican Party they want, not just which horse is likely to finish first.
It makes sense for the party to think this way. Why? Because choosing a nominee simply on the basis of electability may wind up impeding the goals of that party’s base. Dwight Eisenhower was far more electable than conservative hero Robert Taft in 1952, but his two landslide elections wound up solidifying the expansion of the federal government under FDR and Harry S. Truman rather than advancing the agenda of the Republican Party. From the perspective of a Republican loyalist opposed to that expansion, Ike’s victories achieved almost nothing. (And if you throw in his appointment of Earl Warren and William Brennan, two of the most liberal Supreme Court justices in history, you could well argue that Eisenhower’s terms greatly expanded the liberal cause.)
That’s why The New Republic in 2012 could look back on that era and conclude that the “relationship between the 1950s conservative movement and its contemporaneous Republican president was one of mutual ill-will. Conservatives had expected that Eisenhower, as the first Republican president since 1932, would repeal the New Deal; instead he augmented and expanded programs like Social Security, thereby giving them bipartisan legitimacy. … He approved anti-recessionary stimulus spending, extended unemployment compensation, and raised the minimum wage. He pioneered federal aid to education and created the largest public-works program in history in the form of the interstate highway system. He levied gasoline taxes to pay for the highway construction, and believed that cutting income taxes when the federal government was running a deficit would be an act of gross fiscal irresponsibility.â€
From that perspective, it’s unimaginable that today’s GOP, which is far more conservative than it was in Ike’s time, would turn to such an ideologically suspect candidate no matter how “electable†he or she was. In that sense, the GOP base shares the view expressed by ex-Sen. Jim DeMint when he said he’d rather have 30 strong conservatives than 50 centrist Republicans. And a lot of Republican delegates will be thinking just that way as they head into the convention in Cleveland in July.
By contrast, Bernie Sanders—who in some polls runs better against Trump and Cruz than does Clinton—has at least a plausible argument that his candidacy better reflects where the Democrats are going—left—and that the new, younger voters he would draw make a good fit with that direction. For Sanders, the electability argument could work—but only because he’s already made the liberal base happy.
There is one thing that Kasich does have in his favor, however: the argument that Trump doesn’t really channel the party base either, at least when it comes to ideas. Trump too is an apostate on free trade, which has been a core GOP plank until now, and seemingly on health care. Trump also may have done himself no favors by embracing an exception to the draconian abortion plank of the GOP platform. It may appeal to independents, but that’s not where the base of the party is—at least, not if you judge by the past 32 years of party platforms.
But despite his long history in the conservative movement, especially as a key player in the rise of Newt Gingrich as House speaker in the 1990s, Kasich has come to be seen as a heretic too; his decision to accept Medicaid expansion made him a pariah to those in his party who believe that anything associated with “Obama-health-care-idea†should be shunned like the devil’s brew. A year ago he told a few of us journalists that “I think I have the right to try to define what conservatism means.†But if the primaries are any evidence, he has failed to do that with the rank and file of his own party.
Kasich’s argument that he has governed as a conservative has had no impact in a primary where the experience of governing is apparently seen as a liability (as Scott Walker, Chris Christie and Jeb Bush learned). He has tried, for example, to argue that his Medicaid expansion is conservative at heart—it saves money, it keeps lower-income workers off welfare, it gets drug addicts out of jail and into treatment, in the spirit of conservative support of prison reform. But this argument has found no resonance in his party.
Moreover, Cruz’s constant pursuit of a “no enemies to the right†strategy has made it all but impossible for the Ohio governor to make any inroads among true believing conservatives.
Kasich has almost no line to the nomination, but if he’s to have any hope at all he ought to minimize his electability pitch and rejuvenate the idea that he speaks for the base. Because they’re the ones who will decide, and right now they’re thinking of the vote that happens in July, not the one in November. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2886 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: It's clear in our country right now, almost half of American families are a $400 unexpected expense away from complete upheaval.
contextual information: On the 2020 presidential campaign trail, California Sen.Kamala Harrisoften describes the economic hardships faced by American families. She cites statistics on the cost of housing, college, healthcare and how, if elected president, her policies would lessen the burden. Harris took the same approach while speaking on the Pod Save Americapodcastthis week, where she made this claim about economic instability: It's clear in our country right now, almost half of American families are a $400 unexpected expense away from complete upheaval. Weve seen similar versions of this claim before and wanted to know whether Harris statement was accurate. We set out on a fact check. Our research In January, PolitiFact ratedMostly Truea similar claim by Starbucks CEO Howard Schultz. He claimed in a 60 Minutes interview that Over 40 percent of the American people don't have $400 in the bank. Schultz had relied on a May 2018 Federal Reservereporton the well-being of U.S. Households in 2017. It found that Four in 10 adults, if faced with an unexpected expense of $400, would either not be able to cover it or would cover it by selling something or borrowing money. Those findings generally support Harris contention of almost half of American families facing hardship with a $400 cost. A Harris campaign spokeswoman said the senator relied on the Fed report. But we took a deeper look at the survey to examine her contention this would really lead to complete upheaval for almost half of American families. What did the survey ask? Heres the survey question that led to the finding that 40 percent of adults couldnt immediately pay for a $400 unforeseen cost. EF3. Suppose that you have an emergency expense that costs $400. Based on your current financial situation, how would you pay for this expense? If you would use more than one method to cover this expense, please select all that apply. a. Put it on my credit card and pay it off in full at the next statement b. Put it on my credit card and pay it off over time c. With the money currently in my checking/savings account or with cash d. Using money from a bank loan or line of credit e. By borrowing from a friend or family member f. Using a payday loan, deposit advance, or overdraft g. By selling something The findings show that 59 percent of adults in 2017 said they could easily cover (the $400 expense), using entirely cash, savings or a credit card paid off at the next statement. Among those who couldnt easily pay it, 43 percent said they would put it on a credit card and pay it off over time; 26 percent reported they would borrow from a friend or family member; 19 percent said they would sell something; 9 percent responded that they would use a bank loan or line of credit; 5 percent said they would use a payday loan, deposit advance, or overdraft; and 4 percent said they would fined an undefined or other way to pay. And 29 percent said they would not be able to pay the expense right now. Respondents were able to select multiple answers. SOURCE: U.S. Federal Reserve,Report on the Economic Well-Being of U.S. Households in 2017, May 2018 Experts weigh in Daniel Schneider, a UC Berkeley sociology professor whose research specialties include economic instability, reviewed Harris statement, along with the survey and its findings. I think it is an open question about how those other options map with complete upheaval. Is putting something on your credit card to pay off over time complete upheaval? Maybe, he wrote in an email. One could certainly imagine that facing an expense shock and having to resort to (those options) would be stressful. The overall idea behind Harris statement is accurate, Abdur Chowdhury, an economics professor emeritus at Marquette University told us in an email. Chowdhury added, however, that the percentage of people who face a hardship due to a $400 unanticipated cost may be lower today. The survey, from which the figure was quoted, was conducted a few years ago. With the low unemployment rate and increases in wage rate, fewer people are in that 'close to bankruptcy' category, the professor added. A spokeswoman for the Harris campaign provided a written statement: Millions of hard-working Americans can't cover an unexpected $400 expense. They are a medical bill, a car repair, or a rent increase away from having to make painful choices like turning to a neighbor hat in hand to ask for a loan, putting themselves in spiraling credit card debt, selling their car, or heading to a pawn shop with their wedding ring. To presume any of these things would not upend someone's daily life is out of touch. Our rating Sen. Kamala Harris recently claimed: It's clear in our country right now, almost half of American families are a $400 unexpected expense away from complete upheaval. The portion of Harris statement about almost half of families is on the right track. A 2018 Federal Reserve report found 40 percent of adults surveyed could not easily pay for an unforeseen $400 cost. But the report doesnt describe complete upheaval for that group. Instead, it found many would place that expense on a credit card and pay it off over time, borrow money from a friend or family or sell a possession. Those represent very real hardships for families. But to characterize them as leading to complete upheaval is not supported by the facts and takes the survey results out-of-context. We rated Harris claim Half True. HALF TRUE The statement is partially accurate but leaves out important details or takes things out of context. Click here formoreon the six PolitiFact ratings and how we select facts to check. RELATED: Kamala Harris calls her LIFT plan the most significant middle-class tax cut in generations. Is it? Kamala Harris gets it mostly right on Americas rapid growth of student loan debt Are paychecks failing to keep up with inflation? Does teacher pay fall short of the living wage in 30 states, as Kamala Harris said? | 2 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 2 |
FMD2887 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Donald Trump infuriates even the most compassionate and holy amongst us like the Pope, for example. When Pope Francis was asked on Thursday how he felt about the Republican front runner, it took every ounce of the religious leader s strength not to erupt.While Francis was in Mexico, a reporter questioned the Pope about Trump s potential for president. Francis brilliantly slammed the racist GOPer, saying that A person who thinks only about building walls, wherever they may be, and not building bridges, is not Christian. Francis had been referencing Trump s promise to build a wall along the U.S.-Mexican border something that Trump has become infamous for during his campaign, along with his numerous offensive comments about immigrants.When Trump found out about what Francis said about him, he tried to shrug it off, saying, Now it s probably going to be all over the world. Who the hell cares? OK? I don t care. But he cares very much. Thin-skinned and never one to take criticism lightly, Trump fired back at the Pope while at a campaign stop in South Carolina just hours after the pontiff was praying at the border for those who died trying to come to the United States. Trump issued a press release stating that No leader, especially a religious leader, should have the right to question another man s religion or faith, calling Francis comments disgraceful. Trump also added in a few jabs at President Barack Obama. I am proud to be a Christian and as President I will not allow Christianity to be consistently attacked and weakened, unlike what is happening now, with our current President. Unable to accept that maybe he s just a horrible guy and unequipped to be president, Trump whined that the Mexican government had soiled his reputation and turned the Pope against him so they can continue to rip off the United States, both on trade and at the border. Clearly in a huge amount of denial, Trump said: The Pope only heard one side of the story he didn t see the crime, the drug trafficking and the negative economic impact the current policies have on the United States. He doesn t see how Mexican leadership is outsmarting President Obama and our leadership in every aspect of negotiation. Making a case for his offensive approach on immigration, Trump suggested that the Mexican government is using the Pope as a pawn and they should be ashamed of themselves for doing so, especially when so many lives are involved and when illegal immigration is so rampant. This echoes comments Trump had made last week, when he spoke against Francis plans to pray at the border, stating that the Pope was being exploited. In an interview with Fox News, Trump said: I don t think he understands the danger of the open border that we have with Mexico. I think Mexico got him to do it because they want to keep the border just the way it is. They re making a fortune, and we re losing. In his press release, The Donald also suggested that the Pope would be sorry for ever doubting him. He said that if and when ISIS attacks the Vatican, I can promise you that the Pope would have only wished and prayed that Donald Trump would have been president because this would not have happened. Keep dreaming, Donald. Featured image via Flickr / Flickr | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2888 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Marathon Station Refuses GIs Service Claim summaries: Were U.S. soldiers refused service by the owner of a Pontiac gas station?
contextual information: Claim: A Marathon service station owner in Pontiac, Illinois, refused to do business with U.S. soldiers. Example: [Collected via e-mail, 2006] THIS HAPPENED IN PONTIAC, IL I have a good friend who used to ride the van with me to work. Her brother is a friend and is in the military over in Bagdad. I've always told her she's my hero and I wish I had a tiny bit of her nerve. Read what she did last night (below)...and I can honestly see her doing this. She doesn't take cr@p off anyone. Feel free to pass this on...maybe this guy's business will go under! As some of you may know the Marathon gas station in front of what use to be Underdogs and across from the Pawn shop (in Pontiac) is owned by a Pakistani. I've heard some rumors the last 6 months or so that a couple of our soldiers have stopped in, dressed in fatigues, after drill and he would not allow them to purchase anything in the store. They were asked to leave and told their business is not wanted or needed. Apparently this happened again on Sunday. You don't know how much of what you hear is actually true so I stopped in last night on the way to the B & G club. I don't really know why, I'm not sure what I thought I was going to say or do but I had to check this guy out. Luckily he was working. I took my water up to the counter and waited while he played with the tape roll on the machine. I had my wallet out so I could pay him when he was done.. Right there in my wallet was my standard military picture of my brother in front of the flag (most of you know he is serving outside Baghdad right now). He finished what he was working on and was extremely friendly to me as he rang up the water. I placed my wallet on the table and pointed to my brother and asked what he would do if he came in for a water (I couldn't help myself). As uncomfortable as it was with only the two of us in that small store he told me in what was a poor attempt of English that "I give no water, no nothing to him, he may leave", his attitude completely changed. I was taken back, I couldn't believe what just happened. I closed my wallet and left my water on the counter and told him that if he must leave then I must leave too. I could not believe it. I sat in my car and didn't know whether to laugh at him or cry. I guess the reason I'm telling you this is so you can make a decision on whether or not to give him your business. I guess that is why it's America, he is able to come to this country, own a small business taxfree, and refuse business to anyone he wants. It is also our right to stop every person we know from EVER going there again and running his sorry a** out of town. Origins: The years since the September 11 terrorist attacks of 2001 and the U.S. military invasion of Iraq in 2003 have brought us a panoply of (false) rumors about business owners and employees in the U.S. who have supposedly openly celebrated terrorist attacks on America and/or refused to do business with U.S. servicemen. Most often the businesses targeted by such rumors are gas stations, convenience stores, or other small shops, since those types of businesses are frequently owned, operated, or staffed by immigrants from Middle Eastern countries, or by persons mistakenly assumed by Americans to be Mid-East immigrants). (See, for example, "The Hole in the Middle," "This Bud's Not for You," "Leatherneck Cold Shouldered," "The Shunned Serviceman" and "Shell Game.") The Hole in the Middle This Bud's Not for You Leatherneck Cold Shouldered The Shunned Serviceman Shell Game The item quoted at the head of this page began circulating in February 2006 and fits into this same genre of rumor type (i.e., the shunning of U.S. servicemen by Arab/Muslim business owners) by claiming that the "Pakistani" owner of a service station and convenience mart in Pontiac, Illinois, recently refused to sell goods to U.S. servicemen, brusquely sending the soldiers away empty-handed, as well as openly proclaiming to a civilian customer (one whose money he would readily accept) that he would similarly decline to do business with her serviceman brother. The account specifically identifies a Marathon gas station at 922 W. Custer Avenue in Pontiac, and as is typical of such accounts, it errs in its details and has proved to be unverifiable. The Marathon service station referred to has been owned since November 2003 by Satvinder Singh, who wasn't present on the day of the alleged incident, and who is neither a native of Pakistan nor a citizen of that country. (He's a naturalized U.S. citizen who was born in India and has been a resident of the U.S. since 1989.) Mr. Singh himself denies that any such incident took place: Nothing in that e-mail is true. I respect everybody. I wouldn't refuse service to anyone. I am so mad because this is my business. I don't want to lose any of my business. All people are welcome at my store. I don't know why this happened. Mr. Singh's wife, Rupinder Kaur (also a naturalized U.S. citizen who was born in India), elaborated for the Pontiac Daily Leader: Kaur pointed out that neither she nor her husband is Muslim, and said they appreciate the service of members of the Armed Forces. "They go there, they don't know if they're going to come back," she said of members of the military serving in places like Iraq. "My blessings will go always for them. We are depending upon them. They're fighting for us. They're saving us, and why would we want to do such a thing like don't serve them." She said neither she nor her husband was involved in politics. "All customers are welcome. We will never discriminate against anybody," Kaur said. "All the customers, to me, are angels ... We respect all of our customers." The only persons they won't sell to, she added, are minors trying to illegally buy cigarettes or alcohol. "We card them, and we card them hard, because we don't want them to get into trouble." Kaur said that she and her husband are just "normal people" who are trying to make a success of their business, Super Petroleum. "We invested in Pontiac knowing that Pontiac is a good community," she said, noting that the business employs two local persons, generates property and other taxes, and contributes to the city's economy. The station was one of two Pontiac businesses robbed on the same day in December, and one of the two American flags Singh put up was stolen. Moreover, attempts by the Central Illinois Pantagraph to verify any element of the account have proved fruitless: The Pantagraph has been unable to find anyone with a firsthand account of the incidents described in the e-mail, several versions of which have circulated widely throughout Central Illinois. The woman whose name appears as the sender of the e-mail learned of the e-mail on Wednesday. When The Pantagraph contacted her Thursday evening, she declined to comment. Members of the Pontiac National Guard have been unable to find any soldiers within their unit who have experienced such discrimination. "To my knowledge, there hasn't been anyone in the store," National Guard public information officer Capt. Bud Roberts said. "It is not an issue. We don't dwell on rumors." The Livingston County Veterans Assistance Commission also has been unable to confirm information in the e-mail. Other evidence attests to the falsity of the claim: Singh said he spends very little time in the store and didn't work Sunday, when the incident is said to have occurred. "He is one of the nicest people you will ever meet," said Alec Durousseau, who works evenings at the station. "Everything in that e-mail is untrue. It's a complete lie." Tory Zarwell, another employee, and Durousseau said they have never seen Singh express anti-American feelings. They both pointed out an American flag flies in front of the station. Unfortunately, the result of the opprobrious e-mail whether motivated by racism or some other form of spite has been to cause undeserved harm to the reputation of the couple's business: The matter of the e-mails was brought to the owners' attention Wednesday evening by the employee who had been getting phone calls, including a caller who asked if he would be welcome if he came to the station because he had "heard" that someone had been refused service. Someone brought a printout of the e-mail to the station to find out if it were true. On Thursday, every customer was asking about the Internet allegations about refusal to sell to soldiers in uniform. [Kaur] and her husband told their two employees to tell everyone who asked that the allegations were not true. Last updated: 27 February 2006 Sources: Faddoul, John. "Internet E-Mail Charges False, Business Owners Say." The [Pontiac] Daily Leader. 24 February 2006. Walters, Karen. "Station Owner Taken Aback by Rumor Spread in E-Mail." The [Bloomington-Normal] Pantagraph. 25 February 2006. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2889 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: German industry leaders want a shift toward digital services to be a priority as the pro-business Free Democrats (FDP) appear set to enter coalition talks with Angela Merkel s conservatives and the Greens. The FDP, which returned from the German political wilderness with 10.7 percent of the vote in Sunday s election, promise to cut taxes and raise investment in infrastructure, partly funded by privatizations. Investing in high-speed telecoms networks and automation would boost economic activity and global competitiveness and has long been a key demand of Germany s export-led manufacturers although some workers fear it risks job losses. Investments in education and digital infrastructure are urgently needed, Werner Baumann, chief executive of drugmaker Bayer (BAYGn.DE), said in an emailed statement. Joe Kaeser, chief executive of industrial group Siemens (SIEGn.DE) agreed, but warned of marginalizing workers and pushing them into the arms of the far-right Alternative for Germany (AfD), the first far-right party to enter the German parliament in more than half a century. We are an industrial nation and must shape the fourth industrial revolution and design it in a socially inclusive way | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2890 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: David Axelrod is CNN's senior political commentator and host of the podcast " The Axe Files. " He was senior adviser to President Barack Obama and chief strategist for the 2008 and 2012 Obama campaigns. The opinions expressed in this commentary are his.
That's where the Republican Party finds itself today, both in its nominating battle and in its implacable "not even a hearing" stance on the Supreme Court nomination of Judge Merrick Garland.
Privately, and to some degree publicly, Republicans seem resigned to death in November by fire or by hanging. The prolonged nominating process is merely a means of determining the nature of the execution and limiting the risk to other candidates on the ballot.
The normal pattern of GOP nominating contests for the past two decades is that the party endures heated primary fights between populist, evangelical and center-right candidates, only to settle on the leading establishment choice.
Having stoked anti-Obama fever in order to score midterm victories at the polls and then failed to deliver on pledges to derail major elements of the President's agenda, the party elite now finds itself overrun by a wave of outrage and discontent.
That wave has carried Donald Trump to the brink of the nomination, a hostile takeover that so horrifies the Republican establishment that many are now turning in desperation to a man they dislike almost as much as the prospect of Trump as their standard-bearer.
Sen. Ted Cruz's entire tenure since his arrival in Washington in 2013 has been dedicated to taunting a Republican leadership he views as accommodationist.
He called Majority Leader Mitch McConnell a "liar" on the floor of the Senate. He led the party over the cliff of a government shutdown in a vain effort to derail Obamacare. To this day, he casts his campaign as one to upend "the Washington cartel" of insiders and lobbyists who he says have betrayed the GOP and the country.
Now, that same "cartel" is slowly and grudgingly embracing Cruz, who is currently running a distant second to Trump, as their last, best hope to deprive the bilious billionaire of the 1,237 delegates he needs to win the nomination.
Sen. Lindsey Graham's painfully tepid "endorsement" of Cruz last week, followed by Mitt Romney's announcement that he would stand up for the Texas senator in Tuesday's Utah caucuses, reflected the dilemma in which the GOP finds itself.
In backing Cruz, neither of these pillars of the Republican establishment spent a whole lot of time extolling his virtues, focusing instead on the man they are desperate to stop.
"Today, there is a contest between Trumpism and Republicanism," Romney said. "Through the calculated statements of its leader, Trumpism has become associated with racism, misogyny, bigotry, xenophobia, vulgarity and, most recently, threats and violence. I am repulsed by each and every one of these."
So he's for the other guy.
Jeb Bush followed in similarly measured fashion on Wednesday.
Many are gravitating to Cruz, arguing, as Bush did, that his predictable views are more plausible in a Republican nominee than the philosophically promiscuous, cult of personality spectacle that is Trump.
"I don't like Cruz, but I can defend most of his positions with a straight face," one prominent Republican leader told me. "I don't know how I go on TV and make an argument for Trump."
There is a potential bonus of a Cruz nomination, this party leader explained. For the past several cycles, conservative activists have complained that by nominating relatively moderate candidates -- Romney in '12 and Sen. John McCain in '08 -- the party spurned its base and depressed Republican turnout.
"Let's have Cruz, and we will put that issue to rest," said this party leader, convinced that the Texan's appeal, pitched to evangelicals and the right, is too narrow to command a general election. "If it's Trump, there will be no resolution. Each side will blame the other for the disaster."
But all these efforts to stop Trump may well be too late. Even if they succeed in depriving him of the delegates he needs to clinch the nomination, his victory in Arizona's winner-take-all primary meant Trump probably will come close.
That would leave the party establishment in the unhappy position of either embracing the front-runner or courting a rebellion among his supporters by dumping him. And while a few weeks ago, many still talked hopefully about swapping in a fresh and more appealing recruit -- say, House Speaker Paul Ryan -- the somber realization is seeping in that it will be hard enough to topple Trump, much less bypass Cruz at the same time.
Though Hillary Clinton, the presumptive Democratic nominee, would enter a general election campaign with historically high negatives, she is running well ahead of Trump, whose unfavorable ratings eclipse even hers.
Cruz runs a tighter race in early polls. But as a factional candidate, his ability to grow is very much in question.
Only Gov. John Kasich is outrunning Clinton in general election trial heats. But Kasich has won just one of the first 37 nominating contests -- his own state of Ohio -- and netted not one delegate in Tuesday's races in Arizona and Utah.
Kasich's brand of compassionate conservatism might sell in a general, and he would be a comfortable choice for the party establishment. But he has struggled to find traction within a party riven by anger.
The party leaders are prisoners of their base.
Base politics also has trapped the Republican leadership when it comes to Obama's nomination of Merrick Garland to the Supreme Court.
While some opponents have portrayed Garland as a threat to the Second Amendment, his record over 19 years on the federal bench makes it hard to paint the judge out of the mainstream. He is more liberal than Republicans in the Senate would prefer but as moderate a choice as they probably would get from any Democratic president.
A solid majority of Americans feels that the Senate should take up the Garland nomination rather than allowing the seat, left vacant by the death in February of Justice Antonin Scalia, to go unfilled for more than a year.
But were Garland seated to replace Scalia, a conservative judicial icon, he would shift the balance of the court, giving it a majority of Democratic appointees for the first time in decades.
That's why McConnell has ordained that the Garland nomination will not get even a hearing, much less a vote.
The right has threatened summary expulsion for any Senate Republican who breaks ranks with the majority leader over Garland.
Erick Erickson, an influential conservative commentator, threw down the gauntlet on my podcast, "The Axe Files."
"If Republicans cave, I mean, this would be more the end of the Republican Party than Donald Trump," he said. "Because, I mean, going back to Ronald Reagan's election in 1980, the Supreme Court has been the issue of the Republican Party. It comes up in every campaign -- presidential campaign, it comes up in every congressional campaign, every even-numbered year. And if the Republicans were then to say in this year -- after years of saying, 'The Supreme Court hangs in the balance; you must vote Republican' -- 'Hey, we're going to go through with this,' it would be game over."
All this has put the six Republican senators running for re-election in states that voted for Obama in a terrible bind. Swing voters in those states, already probably influenced by the presidential race, also would be among those favoring action on the Garland nomination.
That group includes Judiciary Committee Chairman Chuck Grassley of Iowa, who suddenly is facing a challenge from a former Democratic lieutenant governor, the aptly named Patty Judge.
Playing base politics -- tolerating nativism, birtherism and promising obstruction at every turn -- could cost Republicans the presidency and threaten control of the Senate.
And if the GOP crashes and burns, it will probably get a more liberal court nominee than Garland from the next President Clinton.
For seven years, the GOP establishment knowingly and cynically rode the anti-Obama tiger, feeding the beast with a steady diet of red meat.
Now, whatever happens at the Cleveland convention, the party elite may wind up as dinner. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2891 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Opinions about the Supreme Court’s legitimacy and value usually depend on ideology. Conservatives shouted tyranny after the Supreme Court upended bans on same-sex marriage. Liberals were outraged when the court overturned campaign finance limitations in the Citizens United ruling and gutted the Voting Rights Act in the Shelby County case.
But absent the ideological scoreboard, how can we judge the merit of the court? Is judicial review of laws the best way to avoid political influence? Or is major change more lasting and accepted when it’s accomplished legislatively? | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2892 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Britain s junior Brexit minister said on Monday he was hopeful that EU negotiators would agree to move on to discuss future relationships in October, even after the head of the European Commission said it would take miracles for that to happen. I am very hopeful that everyone will see the mutual advantage of moving on to a discussion of the future relationship in October, Steve Baker told an event at the Conservative Party s annual conference. Britain has been seeking to push the talks beyond the terms of the divorce and on to future ties, including trade, at a European meeting later in October. But Jean-Claude Juncker appeared to dash those hopes when he said last week that the first stage of talks had not made enough progress. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2893 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Foods & Supplements For Chemtrail Protection Nov 5, 2016 0 0
There is no question anymore about it. Chemtrails are real and are not to be confused with contrails. If you’re skeptical, that is okay, though please take a look at the CIA Director’s comments about geoengineering here .
For those understanding that chemtrails pose a real threat to humanity, together we’ll take a look at some foods and health supplements that can be used to help protect yourself against chemtrails.
When barium, nano particles of aluminum, radioactive thorium, mercury, lead, ethylene dibromide and many other toxic chemicals and heavy metals are being sprayed into our atmosphere, it is a good idea to learn how to properly defend your body from such contaminants. Chemtrails or contrails?
Foods
The first thing to keep in mind regarding detoxification and health is that we must include foods that help us to naturally detoxify our body, while still taking in nutrients. Any food that has lots of chlorophyll in it will help tremendously in detoxing as well as providing essential nutrients our cells need. Ensuring to include plenty of spinach, green salads, arugula, cilantro, parsley, kale, cucumbers and other green veggies into your meals is a great way to begin.
Looking more specifically at cilantro, we find that when combined with chlorella, it can remove a very large amount of heavy metals within a short time frame. In fact, studies done at the Optimal Wellness Test Research Center showed that within 42 days of using cilantro and chlorella, 74% of aluminum, 91% of Mercury and 87% of lead within the body was removed. It was noted that using cilantro and chlorella in conjunction was important because cilantro mobilizes many more toxins than it can remove from the body, whereas with chlorella also in the bloodstream, it can act to remove the excess toxins found in the bloodstream.
Other foods to consider using are spirulina and medicinal mushrooms like Reishi, Lion’s Mane, Chaga and Agarikon. Chaga mushrooms have been scientifically proven to protect against DNA degradation, remove synthetic chemicals and heavy metals, and purify the blood. Cilantro is a wonderful medicinal herb.
Health Supplements
Fulvic acid is a health supplement gaining massive attention in the health supplement field, thanks in large part to Dr. Dan Nuzum . Fulvic acid is the end product of a process called humification. Microorganisms decompose plant matter in the soil which results in fulvic and humic acids. These are perhaps the most important and nutrient rich substances on the planet. In fact, fulvic acid is the most potent anti-oxidant known as it contains over 14 tetratrillion electrons (that’s 14 with 21 zeroes behind it) that it can donate to neutralize free radicals.
This gives it an incredible ability to provide electrochemical balance within the cell, which is crucial for detoxification. It also is rich in electrolytes, increases the synthesis rate of RNA and DNA, increases assimilation of vitamins and minerals into cells.
It also reacts very quickly with radioactive material and renders them neutral and harmless upon contact with such destructive elements. According to Supreme Fulvic :
“ Radioactive elements have an affinity for humic and fulvic acids . They form organo-metal complexes of different absorptive stability and solubility. Uranium and plutonium are influenced by humic substances as are other polluting metals, each being solubilized and absorbed, thereby annihilating that specific radioactivity . Radioactive substances react rapidly with fulvic acid, and only a brief time is required for equilibrium to be reached.”
Additionally, fulvic acids help tremendously with transforming toxic metals in the body :
“Fulvic acid has the power to form stable water soluble complexes with monovalent, divalent, trivalent, and ployvalent metal ions. It can aid the actual movement of metal ions that are normally difficult to mobilize or transport. Fulvic acids are excellent natural chelators and cation exchangers, and are vitally important in the nutrition of cells.”
The source of fulvic acid is important though as Optimally Organic notes that getting fulvic acid from vegetation rather than dried rock beds is best as the excess carbon found in the fulvic from rock beds makes the fulvic ineffective. An incredible health supplement.
In addition to fulvic acid to help against destructive chemicals in the air, nascent iodine is something to also consider.
Nascent iodine is iodine that is in atomic form rather than molecular form. This form of iodine is easily absorbed by the body and is what is produced by the thyroid gland . Having enough iodine in the body is necessary for normal T3 and T4 hormone production as well as in assisting the detoxification process.
In a person who has given themselves sufficient iodine, radioactive iodine(extremely harmful) can’t bind into our body’s receptor cells and will be flushed out. However, it is important to ensure the body is receiving enough absorbable iodine, which nascent iodine provides. Solar frequencies directly interact with our DNA.
Why Chemtrails?
There are a couple reasons discussed as to why chemtrails occur in our skies. The first is that some believe that shadow government want to keep people sick and unwell, so the pharmaceutical and western medical establishments continue to financially profit off of sick and unwell people. The second is that the shadow government wants to block out the Sun’s rays as much as possible. The first is that they know sunlight is actually healthy for a person and the second is so that our DNA does not continue to receive upgrades from the light that comes forth from the Sun. Remember that Russian scientists have scientifically shown how light positively affects DNA.
Additionally, engineer and scientist Maurice Cotterell has stated that genetic mutations and upgrades occur through the action of ionizing radiation and that X-rays and gamma rays from the Sun are the key factor in genetic leaps that species have taken and will continue to take.
What are your thoughts on all of this? Which supplements do you take to boost overall health? Do you take any specifically for protection from harmful chemicals being sprayed in the air and on genetically modified foods? What are your thoughts about the Sun affecting our DNA? Why are chemtrails happening?
Lance Schuttler graduated from the University of Iowa with a degree in Health Science and practices health coaching through his website Orgonlight Health . You can follow the Orgonlight Health facebook page or visit the website for more information on how to receive health coaching for yourself, a family member or a friend as well as view other inspiring articles. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2894 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: South Korea s environment ministry will announce on Monday its approval of an environmental assessment report for the deployment of a U.S. anti-missile defense system in the country, a ministry official told Reuters. South Korea said in June that it will hold off installing remaining components of the Terminal High Altitude Area Defense (THAAD) until it completes an assessment of the system s impact on the environment. The ministry will hold a briefing on the decision at 3:30 p.m. (0630 GMT) on Monday, the official said. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2895 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: Western Lynch Mob on Russia Ties Itself up in Absurd Knots By Finian Cunningham
October 31, 2016 " Information Clearing House " - " RT " - The Western lynch mob-like campaign to get Russia goes on, with the gathering this week of the United Nations Human Rights Council. By trying to suspend Russia from the council, the flagrant intent is to discredit and further demonize. The 47-member UNHRC, based in Geneva, is the United Nations premier inter-governmental forum on human rights. Members are selected on a rotational basis. On Friday, 14 seats on the council are up for renewal.
This week 80 mainly Western non-governmental organizations associated with human rights reportedly urged the UNHRC to drop Russias membership, citing allegations of war crimes committed during military operations to capture the Syrian city of Aleppo.
Over 80 NGOs call for Russia to be dropped from UN rights council over Syria https://t.co/uKTfWXWOLn
RT (@RT_com) 24 октября 2016 г. Among the anti-Russia lobby were US-based and George Soros-funded Human Rights Watch. Notably, billionaire financier Soros is an open advocate for regime change in Russia.
The campaign to undermine Russia at the UNHRC was preceded last week when Britain also a member of the council convened a summit in Geneva. The council issued a resolution which pointedly condemned bombing of civilians in Syria, and implicitly laid the blame on Russia and allied Syrian state forces.
Russias permanent representative in Geneva Alexey Borodavkin rebuked the UNHRC for a one-sided, politicized statement, which he said sought to solely impugn Russia and Syria. He noted the rank hypocrisy of the United States, Britain and France, along with Gulf Arab states, which lobbied for the resolution.
Radar data proves Belgian F-16s attacked village near Aleppo, killing 6 - Russian military https://t.co/Aj8mgT39ri pic.twitter.com/XHU4ljZb4H
RT (@RT_com) 20 октября 2016 г. These states have been arming and funding terrorist groups in Syria since the eruption of the war in March 2011. They are also sending their air forces on illegal bombing raids across the country in the name of fighting terrorism which has resulted in hundreds of civilian casualties and the destruction of social infrastructure, such as roads, bridges, public buildings and residential homes.
In recent months, warplanes dispatched by the US, France and Belgium (the latter two current members of the UNHRC) have carried out air strikes on Syria causing dozens of civilian casualties.
So, of course, Western-orchestrated claims against Russia over alleged human rights violations in Syria are patently hypocritical and belie their own criminality.
The contrived effort to delist Russia from the UNHRC has the same hallmark as other Western media campaigns to discredit Moscow, such as the banning of Russian athletes from the Rio Olympics on dubious drug-abuse charges, or the pseudo-probe into the downing of the Malaysian airliner in 2014 over Ukraine, or overblown claims that Russian aggression is threatening the security of Europe. We can also include baseless accusations made by shadowy US intelligence agencies that Russia is hacking into computer systems to somehow disrupt the American presidential elections next month.
Saudi Arabia poised to be reelected to UN Human Rights Council https://t.co/sqWeSwjg48 #UNHR #SaudiArabia #humanrights
RT (@RT_com) 27 октября 2016 г. The UNHRC debacle is one strand in a bundle of psychological operations aimed at isolating, demonizing and delegitimizing Russia.
Perhaps the knock out absurdity in the latest rush by the Western lynch mob is the relation of Britain and Saudi Arabia, both of which are current members of the UNHRC seeking renewal of their seats.
That Saudi Arabia widely seen as the most repressive regime on Earth is even a member of the prestigious Geneva council is due to Britain engaging in underhand vote rigging to help its oil-rich ally gain a seat, according to documents released last year by WikiLeaks.
A Saudi-led military coalition continues to slaughter thousands of Yemeni civilians by bombing schools, hospitals, mosques, marketplaces, funeral halls, factories and residential homes. Human rights groups like HRW and UN agencies are well aware of this Saudi campaign of mass murder in Yemen. It is also well documented that US, British, French and German weaponry worth billions of dollars is assisting the Saudi regime in its war crimes. That makes these Western states fully complicit.
Moscow summons Belgian ambassador, presents data on F-16s bombing of Syrian civilians https://t.co/WzwvworaZd pic.twitter.com/cHlKvzaeUD
RT (@RT_com) 21 октября 2016 г. Germany, for example, which is also a current member of the UNHRC, has seen its arms exports to Saudi Arabia jump by 250 percent over the past two years, according to a report last week.
Britain, the ringleader of the media campaign to denigrate Russia in Geneva, has sold over $4 billion worth of armaments to Saudi Arabia since the oil kingdom launched its aggression on its southern neighbor in March 2015. Even while Saudi Arabia is committing the most egregious crimes against humanity, the British government continues to send Royal Air Force pilots to help train Saudi counterparts, brazenly denying that there is any breach of international law.
There is little or no protest from the 80 NGO rights groups about these applicant states to the next cohort of the UNHRC.
The hypocrisy and double standards of serial human rights violators make their condemnations against Russia null and void.
Importantly too, is to not merely rebut the accusers as hypocrites, but to also elucidate the anti-Russia claims as fabrications.
The information that Western governments, rights groups and media base their claims of Russia bombing civilians is garnered from entirely dubious and partisan sources. Endless reports on Syria and the battle for the northern city of Aleppo broadcast by multibillion dollar Western news organizations are based, incongruously, either on claims issued by the British-located so-called Syrian Observatory for Human Rights, or by activist groups within terrorist-held east Aleppo, which are funded by Western governments, such as the purported rescue workers of the White Helmets and the Aleppo Media Center.
BREAKING: UN Human Rights Council votes to open probe into #Aleppo war crimes https://t.co/xrdojTxO3v pic.twitter.com/2gKhTiMovH
RT (@RT_com) 21 октября 2016 г. In other words, Western governments, media, rights groups, and, sadly, UN agencies are promulgating an anti-Russia narrative that is recycled terrorist propaganda.Good proof of this is seen on the TV station called Free Syria broadcast across the Middle East and North Africa on Saudi-owned satellite platform ArabSat.
Free Syria is a crude propaganda channel funded by the Saudi monarchy. It features jingoistic images of Saudi King Salman, along with Saudi troops, warplanes and tanks.
Free Syria also features links to the militant group Ahrar al-Sham, which is implicated in countless terrorist crimes along with Nusra and ISIS. Bearded militants are routinely shown firing mortars while shouting Islamist slogans.
Another regular contributor to the images and reports on this Saudi-funded, terrorist-supporting channel are the White Helmets and the Aleppo Media Center. Thus, on this publicly available Free Syria channel what we see in stark reality is how state sponsor, terrorist networks and propaganda machine come together in a self-incriminating amalgam.
What is even more damning is that the same information is disseminated albeit in a more polished form through Western news outlets, such as CNN, BBC, France 24 and a gamut of supposedly respectable newspapers, like the New York Times and British Guardian.
Its an astounding feat how reality can be so inverted. Russias military is legally justified in assisting the allied sovereign government of Syria to defeat a covert war to topple the state. That war is a criminal enterprise fueled by Washington, London and Paris through the deployment of myriad terrorist proxies.
And to add insult to injury, these terrorist-sponsoring rogue states then turn around and accuse Russia at a UN Human Rights Council based on propaganda sourced from their terrorist proxies.
The utter insanity of it all. But maybe the Western lynch mob will eventually get hoisted on their own coiling ropes of deception. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2896 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: The relationship between the United States and China is an extremely delicate one. They are the world s second-largest power, right behind ourselves. Therefore, it is important not to offend them or to antagonize their leadership. However, that is just what our soon to be Tweeter-in-Chief is spending his Sunday evening doing.After the insanity of taking a phone call from the Taiwanese President something no American president or president-elect has done since 1979 Trump decided to take to Twitter to criticize China over their rebuking of the call in violation of the One China policy most developed world powers have adhered to for decades. Trump ranted:This is likely in response to the fact that China has decided to level a formal complaint regarding Trump s behavior with the United States government. Of course, unable to be challenged or criticized for any reason, Trump is lashing out via Twitter in his usual reckless and unfiltered way. Once again, Trump proves that his temperament doesn t even allow him to run a Twitter account responsibly, much less a nation, and yet here we are. God help us all.Featured image via Drew Angerer/Getty Images | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2897 | Task: Please determine whether the text is 0. Fake or 1. True. Answer directly without explanations. Text: GaryNorth.com November 1, 2016
Here is a video of a recent protest at the University of California, Berkeley, the nation’s most academically prestigious tax-funded university. It is the premier state school today. It was in 1964. It was in 1880.
This is not a threat to the social order. It is an annoyance for students who want to go to class.
WHERE AND WHEN THE SIXTIES BEGAN
On September 10, 1964, the Free Speech Movement began at Berkeley. Almost no one remembers why.
The University’s Board of Regents had long imposed restrictions on what kinds of recruiting were possible on school property. Everyone involved in student government knew the rules. Every group had to be approved: fraternities, sororities, religious groups, and political activists. The underlying motivation, more than anything, was to restrict religious proselytizing: the church/state separation issue.
There were almost no conservative political groups on any of the six campuses (San Diego was opening with under 200 undergraduates that semester). As an undergraduate, I was probably the hardest core right-winger in any of the student governments on the five campuses. I had been involved in student government. I had been president of the sophomore class (1960) and president of the Associated Men Students (1961). I was part of an elite group of campus leaders called the California Club. The president of the University, Clark Kerr, met with us once year.
In the fall of 1964, a 26-foot strip of land close to the Berkeley campus on Telegraph Avenue had long been used by Left-wing activists for recruiting. They set up tables at the beginning of the school year. In early September, the University’s administration learned that this strip of land was actually inside the boundaries of the campus. So, the rules governing recruiting applied.
The Assistant Dean of Students, Katherine Towle, decided to enforce the rules. She sent out a letter on September 14.
“Provisions of the policy of The Regents concerning `Use of University Facilities’ will be strictly enforced in all areas designated as property of The Regents… including the 26-foot strip of brick walkway at the campus entrance on Bancroft Way and Telegraph Avenue…””Specifically, Section III of the (Regents’) policy…prohibits the use of University facilities `for the purpose of soliciting party membership or supporting or opposing particular candidates or propositions in local, state or national elections,’ except that Chief Campus Officers `shall establish rules under which candidates for public office (or their designated representatives) may be afforded like opportunity to speak upon the campuses at meetings where the audience is limited to the campus community.’ Similarly, Chief Campus Officers “shall establish rules under which persons supporting or opposing propositions in state or local elections may be afforded like opportunity to speak upon the campuses at meetings where the audience is limited to the campus community.”
“Section III also prohibits the use of University facilities `for the purpose of religious worship, exercise or conversion.’ Section IV of the policy states further that University facilities `may not be used for the purpose of raising money to aid projects not directly connected with some authorized activity of the University…’
“Now that the so-called `speaker ban’ is gone, and the open forum is a reality, student organizations have ample opportunity to present to campus audiences on a `special event’ basis an unlimited number of speakers on a variety of subjects, provided the few basic rules concerning notification and sponsorship are observed… The `Hyde Park’ area in the Student Union Plaza is also available for impromptu, unscheduled speeches by students and staff.
“It should be noted also that this area on Bancroft Way… has now been added to the list of designated areas for the distribution of handbills, circulars or pamphlets by University students and staff in accordance with Berkeley campus policy. Posters, easels and card tables will not be permitted in this area because of interference with the flow of (pedestrian) traffic. University facilities may not, of course, be used to support or advocate off-campus political or social action.
“We ask for the cooperation of every student and student organization in observing the full implementation of these policies. If you have any questions, please do not hesitate to come to the Office of the Dean of Students, 201 Sproul Hall.”
This was reasonable. She was enforcing the rules. The Best of Gary North Tags: Gary North [ ] is the author of Mises on Money . Visit http://www.garynorth.com . He is also the author of a free 31-volume series, An Economic Commentary on the Bible . Copyright © 2016 Gary North | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
FMD2898 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Nearly one in four people in their prime working years are not working.
contextual information: During the 2016 presidential campaign, Donald Trump got several things about the labor market very wrong, notably suggesting that the unemployment rate might be 42 percent. (It's not; that received a "Pants on Fire" rating.) However, at a Nov. 4 rally in Atkinson, N.H., Trump offered a statistic that was much closer to the mark. "At the core of my contract is my plan to bring back our jobs, about time," he said, later adding that nearly one in four people in their prime working years are not working. "They want to work. They're not working." When we checked with several economists, they indicated that the most commonly used age span for defining prime working years is 25 to 54. So we looked at the employment-to-population ratio for ages 25 to 54—that is, the percentage of people in that age range who are working, divided by the total number of people in that age range. (We also spot-checked the data for ages 18 to 64 and 25 to 64 and did not find significant differences from 25 to 54.) According to the most recent data from the federal Bureau of Labor Statistics—covering October 2016—78.2 percent of the population between 25 and 54 was working. Flip that percentage, and 21.8 percent of the population between 25 and 54 was not working. So Trump is on solid ground saying nearly one in four. That said, we'll try to put this number in some historical context. Here's a chart for this statistic that goes back to 1948. The chart shows the percentage of people working. First, simply citing this figure ignores that the percentage of people in this age range who are working has risen steadily during President Barack Obama's presidency. The chart below shows that this ratio has risen by 3.4 percentage points since its most recent low point during the Obama presidency—74.8 percent in November 2010. So just citing the number overlooks that the figure has been trending in the right direction for the past six years. Second, it's worth noting that the current ratio is not all that far from its all-time high—81.9 percent in April 2000. Prime working age coincides with the prime childbearing and child-rearing age, and it makes sense that some people will choose not to work during at least some of those years. So it's not as if this number has always been pushing 100 percent and is now suddenly down dramatically. On the other hand, economists say that Trump has identified a legitimate concern about the current labor market—that the employment rate among prime-working-age Americans has not recovered to its level prior to the Great Recession. Despite more than six years of steady job growth, the employment-to-population ratio for those aged 25 to 54 has not yet returned to its immediate pre-Great Recession peak of 80.3 in January 2007. Today, it's still 2.1 percentage points below that peak. Moreover, every single month but two of President George W. Bush's two terms in office had a higher percentage than today's, even though Bush took office during an economic downturn, albeit a milder one. The trend line for men has been particularly problematic. As the following chart shows, the employment ratio for men in this age range was almost always above 90 percent prior to 1980, and in the immediate pre-Great Recession period, it was in the 87 percent range. Under Obama, it has rebounded from a low of 80.6 percent, but it was still only at 85 percent in October 2016—lower than its pre-recession level. In other words, we may be looking at a new, lower normal for prime-working-age employment, particularly for men—and unlike some other employment statistics, this is one that is not shaped by an ongoing surge of baby boomer retirements. Our ruling: Trump said that nearly one in four people in their prime working years are not working. The actual percentage is 21.8 percent, so Trump's phrasing is reasonable. However, putting it this way does ignore that this number has declined steadily under Obama for the past six years, and it also overlooks that it's not that far from the all-time low. Still, economists agree that Trump is raising a legitimate concern, since even after six years of improvement, the percentage today remains worse than it was prior to the Great Recession, suggesting that it might represent a new, more worrisome normal. We rate his claim Mostly True. | 1 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 1 |
FMD2899 | Task: Please determine whether the claim is 0. False, 1. True, or 2. Not Enough Information (NEI) based on contextual information, and provide an appropriate explanation.
The answer need to use the following format:
Prediction: [0. False, 1. True, or 2. NEI]
Explanation: [Explain why the above prediction was made]
Claim: Did Alex Trebek's wealth bring his family to tears? Claim summaries: The "Jeopardy" game show host's death was used in what's referred to as advertising network "arbitrage."
contextual information: Alex Trebek's net worth became the subject of strange online advertisements in the weeks following his death. The husband, father, and "Jeopardy" game show host died on Nov. 8, 2020, after a battle with advanced pancreatic cancer. The ad in question read: "Alex Trebek's Net Worth Left His Family In Tears." This was false—misleading, baseless, and untrue. The ads were sponsored by LifeExact, The Financial Mag, Travel Patriot, and perhaps others, and were routed through Zemanta, which is owned by Outbrain. Crunchbase defines Outbrain as "a content discovery platform providing publishers a service for recommended links to increase traffic and generate revenue." Outbrain (via Zemanta) provided the technology that allowed the Trebek ads to appear, while LifeExact, The Financial Mag, and Travel Patriot hosted the landing pages. The landing pages featured an image slideshow, with one celebrity name and net worth figure per page. The slideshow story was headlined: "52 Celebrities & Their Huge Net Worth: Chadwick Boseman's Net Worth Left Us in Disbelief." The "net worth left family in tears" advertising lure has also been used by advertising networks exploiting the names of Kenny Rogers, Sean Connery, and Pat Sajak. However, Sajak is still alive and, as of this writing, is on the first page of the "52 Celebrities" slideshow. While the headline claimed the story was about 52 celebrities, including Chadwick Boseman, who died on Aug. 28, 2020, Boseman did not appear until after 140 clicks, on slide 140. Trebek appeared after 141 clicks, on slide 141. His page was the end of the slideshow. Trebek's page did not acknowledge his cancer or passing. The page, which claimed his net worth was $50 million, was likely created in the past and may have been moved along with Boseman's page to the end of the 141-page slideshow after their deaths. The one-item-per-click slideshow model is known in the online advertising world as "arbitrage." On the business and technology blog Margins, run by Ranjan Roy and Can Duruk, Roy defines arbitrage as "leveraging an inefficient set of systems to make a riskless profit, usually by buying and selling the same asset." He also called it "the mythical free lunch that economics tells us does not exist." In arbitrage, the advertising network's goal is to make more money on the ads displayed to readers who click through the slideshow than it costs to advertise the false "net worth left his family in tears" claim that lured them to it. As the family grieved Trebek's passing, on Nov. 11, his wife, Jean, shared a heartfelt message with a photograph from their wedding day. She posted to Instagram: "My family and I sincerely thank you all for your compassionate messages and generosity. Your expressions have truly touched our hearts. Thank you so very, very much. Many blessings to all, Jean Trebek." In sum, the ads claiming that Alex Trebek's net worth "left his family in tears" were misleading and false. Snopes debunks a wide range of content, and online advertisements are no exception. Misleading ads often lead to obscure websites that host lengthy slideshow articles with many pages. It's called advertising "arbitrage." The advertiser's goal is to make more money on ads displayed on the slideshow's pages than it costs to show the initial ad that lured them to it. | 0 | [
"0",
"1",
"2"
] | 0 |
Subsets and Splits
No community queries yet
The top public SQL queries from the community will appear here once available.