Culture & Society Blog

"Of all the animosities which have existed among mankind, those which are caused by difference of sentiments in religion appear to be the most inveterate and distressing, and ought most to be deprecated. I was in hopes that the enlightened and liberal policy, which has marked the present age, would at least have reconciled Christians of every denomination so far that we should never again see the religious disputes carried to such a pitch as to endanger the peace of society." - George Washington

Feb 21, 2017

"Islamic Terrorism" Is An Arab Problem And Not A "Muslim" Problem - Fareed Zakaria

Background:
1. Rachel Maddow On How Right-Wing Extremist Attacks Are Ignored By The Media In Favor Of Jihadist Violence
2. Calling White Terrorists "Mentally Insane" Doesn't Change What They Are (Just Ask The Terrified People Who Were Their Victims)
3. Hasan Minhaj Shows How Fox News Uses Sensationalism ("Radical Islam") To Drum Up Fear & Hysteria! (Kinda)
4. A Sampling Of Biblical Scripture For The Non-Fact Based Media Commentator

Context left out of the media (particularly Fox News): Here is basically what's going on with additional information to fill out the empty spaces everyone leaves to help the GOP with their cover-up of the Bush wars (even during election campaigning)... but this clip provides useful information normally left out of much of the "news" media discussions;

Fareed's Take: Why they still hate us Fareed looks at the dynamics of the Arab world and how the balance between dictators and jihadis has changed since 9/11.Source: CNN

NOTES:

Weighted Muslim Population Distribution Map (a small percentage of Muslims are used by the "anti-Muslims" folk to paint all of them like the Nazis must have done to the Jews... also, local factors such as economics and/or past inference by US is almost ALWAYS left out. O! How wonderful it is to be so blameless. F*** history... or at least, so goes the Fox News and GOP mantra)

Distribution Of The 2 Main - And Generally Opposing - Sects of Islam

Note: There few thousand (or hundred thousand or so) radical Muslims in a population of 1.57 billion Muslims.

Ron Paul's "Why THEY Attack US" (It's basically "blowback" from our actions - see links below)

About 5 minutes into the above video Ron Paul is asked about Jihad/Suicide Attacks and he highly recommends the research done by Robert Pape

Take a look at the research he is talking about (or watch a presentation of his on C-Span below)...

The Logic of Suicide Terrorism: It’s the occupation, not the fundamentalism The American Conservative: Your new book, Dying to Win, has a subtitle: The Logic of Suicide Terrorism. Can you just tell us generally on what the book is based, what kind of research went into it, and what your findings were? Robert Pape: Over the past two years, I have collected the first complete database of every suicide-terrorist attack around the world from 1980 to early 2004. This research is conducted not only in English but also in native-language sources—Arabic, Hebrew, Russian, and Tamil, and others—so that we can gather information not only from newspapers but also from products from the terrorist community. The terrorists are often quite proud of what they do in their local communities, and they produce albums and all kinds of other information that can be very helpful to understand suicide-terrorist attacks.

This wealth of information creates a new picture about what is motivating suicide terrorism. Islamic fundamentalism is not as closely associated with suicide terrorism as many people think. The world leader in suicide terrorism is a group that you may not be familiar with: the Tamil Tigers in Sri Lanka. This is a Marxist group, a completely secular group that draws from the Hindu families of the Tamil regions of the country. They invented the famous suicide vest for their suicide assassination of Rajiv Ghandi in May 1991. The Palestinians got the idea of the suicide vest from the Tamil Tigers. TAC: So if Islamic fundamentalism is not necessarily a key variable behind these groups, what is? RP: The central fact is that overwhelmingly suicide-terrorist attacks are not driven by religion as much as they are by a clear strategic objective: to compel modern democracies to withdraw military forces from the territory that the terrorists view as their homeland. From Lebanon to Sri Lanka to Chechnya to Kashmir to the West Bank, every major suicide-terrorist campaign—over 95 percent of all the incidents—has had as its central objective to compel a democratic state to withdraw. TAC: That would seem to run contrary to a view that one heard during the American election campaign, put forth by people who favor Bush’s policy. That is, we need to fight the terrorists over there, so we don’t have to fight them here. RP: Since suicide terrorism is mainly a response to foreign occupation and not Islamic fundamentalism, the use of heavy military force to transform Muslim societies over there, if you would, is only likely to increase the number of suicide terrorists coming at us.

We are fighting people OVER THERE ... who are fighting us BECAUSE we are OVER THERE!!!!

Details:

Mother Jones: America's Devil's Game with Extremist Islam - A Timeline of US-Cold War Politics and the Rise of Militant Islamism
Salon: Patraeus & U.S. terror: CIA pressures Obama to step up indiscriminate attacks in Yemen

BBC-Guardian Exposé Uses WikiLeaks to Link Iraq Torture Centers to U.S. Col. Steele & Gen. Petraeus

CNN: In declassified document, CIA acknowledges role in '53 Iran coup (Note: All terrorist attacks have been from people in the the sunni sect & not the shia sect of Islam, which Iran is mostly composed of.)

Moment Of Zen - Daily Show: "Their main problem with Ron Paul... is because he won't pre-agree to start a war with Iran" - Jon Stewart ...

The Daily Show
Get More: Daily Show Full Episodes,The Daily Show on Facebook,Daily Show Video Archive

An example to study (notice how Ben Affleck instinctively sense Bill Mahers argument is wrong... also notice how Christian Scripture never comes up! It's as if the Constitution - with its separation of Church and State - has nothing to do with America's liberalism"!);

Ben Affleck calls Bill Maher’s views on Islam ‘racist’ and ‘gross’
Chris Hayes examines a heated exchange between the two celebrities on their views on Islam.

The Main Discussion;

Real Time with Bill Maher: Ben Affleck, Sam Harris and Bill Maher Debate Radical Islam (HBO)

2:20 has to be my favorite moment with Bill Maher shrugging and Ben Affleck exclaiming "Jesus.
This was in response to "Islam is the mother load of bad ideas" - Listen to white guy in second video below.

2:50 "people standing up to them like Malala or...' (bunch of other studies not covered in the media as it would be the opposite of smearing which is the media's current goal)

At 4:05 the guy comes with an interesting idea that i might be inclined to agree with (the Muslim world is going through a dark age, not as bad as the Christian dark age with burning of witches and all, but a dark age nevertheless).

It's important to understand 2 things about that idea 1. He estimates it at 20% which seems fair to me. 2. Holding strange beliefs is normal for large human populations, for example;

One in four Americans think Obama may be the antichrist, survey says - Poll asking voters about conspiracy theories reveals alarming beliefs – including 37% believing global warming to be a hoax

Quarter of Republicans Think Obama May Be the Anti-Christ

A5 6:10 the Michael Steele does get it right that the media doesnt cover important stuff making most news a sort of smear campaign (one which Bill Maher has been witnessing for years already and probably doesn't realize it yet).

7:50 Ben Afflek is right we look at Iraq etc. and think oooops we made a mistake and don't even carry out an investigation(the last part is me).

At no point did they cover economic situations of those involved. It's touched upon in the second video below.

I'm very confused where Bill Maher is getting the 90% figure on how Muslims feel about someone leaving thier religion. Oh! Nevermind. Found it. From CNN:

Maher then cited a Pew Research poll that he claimed found that 90% of Egyptians supported the death penalty for those who left Islam. I'm not sure where Maher got his numbers, but a 2013 Pew poll actually found only 64% of Egyptians supported this -- still alarmingly high, but not 90%.

Another useful extractfrom CNN:

More importantly, Egypt does not define the Muslim world. Rather, Egypt is simply one of 47 Muslim-majority nations. That same poll found that in Turkey, a nation that has almost as many Muslims as Egypt, less than 5% supported the death penalty for leaving Islam. Maher also has left out that only 13 Muslim nations have penalties for apostasy, while 34 do not.

So who truly defines Islam? To Maher, clearly it's the worst of our faith. That's something you would expect to hear from a far-right bigot, not a liberal.

Maher's remarks dismayed American Muslims across the country but won applause from all the hosts on Fox News' "The Five." When you're a progressive and a gaggle of Fox News hosts praises your views, you know something is seriously wrong.

Ben Affleck blasts Bill Maher over perception of Islam
A heated conversation between actor Ben Affleck, author Sam Harris and TV Host Bill Maher highlighted the ongoing battle against ISIS, and the impact the group has on the world’s view of Islam. Michael Eric Dyson, Dean Obeidallah and James Paterson discuss.

Aslan: Maher 'not very sophisticated'

Lessons In Propaganda From Fox News

Fox News

Analyzing Fox News Rhetoric & "Conservatism"

The "Real News" Media's Double Standard On Terrorism

Feb 20, 2017

9/11 History: Breaking News From Architects & Engineers For 9/11 Truth (www.AE911truth.Org)

This is a collection of breaking news on the 9/11 front.

PRESS RELEASE: Reports on Collapse of World Trade Center Don't Add Up, Says Former Federal Employee

Video: The Third Tower - BSA Space - Dec. 16, 2016 - Richard Gage, AIA

AE911Truth founder and CEO Richard Gage, AIA, provides an overview of the evidence related to the collapse of WTC 7 on December 16, 2016, at the BSA Space, home of the Boston Society of Architects.

Gage’s hour-long presentation at the BSA Space was AE911Truth’s first-ever in-person continuing education course on the collapse of WTC 7. More than a dozen architects received one learning unit for their participation.

Video: The Third Tower - BSA Space - Dec. 16, 2016 - Dr. Leroy Hulsey

On December 16, 2016, at the BSA Space (home of the Boston Society of Architects), Dr. Leroy Hulsey, PE, chair of the Civil and Environmental Engineering Department at the University of Alaska Fairbanks, gives an update on his WTC 7 computer modeling study and its preliminary finding that fire could not and did not cause the building's collapse on 9/11. He also outlines the next steps of his research, which will include an exploration of the failures required to reproduce the observed symmetrical, free-fall behavior of the building. For more information, visit http://AE911Truth.org and http://WTC7Evaluation.org.

Video: Dr. Leroy Hulsey Testifies before Panel of Attorneys

Video: Dr. MacQueen Presents Analysis of WTC Eyewitness Accounts

Video: Attorney Daniel Sheehan Gives Sage Advice on Bringing a 9/11 Civil Action

Brand New Reports On WTC7

By Engineer Chris Sarns

FRAUD EXPOSED IN NIST WTC 7 REPORTS — All things being equal, the fire would have spread consistently. But the NIST computer model inexplicably bypassed the offices to the southwest of column 79, burned around column 79 on the east side, and then, two hours later, burned the offices to the southwest of column 79.

Editor’s Note: To this day, most people, including many architects and engineers, are not aware that a third skyscraper, World Trade Center Building 7, mysteriously collapsed a few hours after the World Trade Center Twin Towers on September 11, 2001. The official report by the National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST) on this building’s collapse has been challenged by many reputable and credentialed technical professionals. They point out that the NIST analysis has not undergone the rigors of scientific peer review — the typical pathway for validating significant scientific theories. Chris Sarns’ research appears in Dr. David Ray Griffin’s book, The Mysterious Collapse of World Trade Center 7. Sarns has been deeply involved in the work of AE911Truth, where he provides his expertise on WTC 7. The studies in this five-part series, written for Architects & Engineers for 9/11 Truth and originally published between May and September 2013, represent years of work that Sarns did in unraveling some of the most glaring inconsistencies and outright frauds in the NIST report on World Trade Center 7. He demonstrates that NIST’s theory of a fire-induced collapse of Building 7 is faulty and misleading. The destruction of this skyscraper on September 11 was truly unprecedented in the history of high-rise buildings. Part 1 of Sarns' series (below) was first published in May 2013, when close to 2,000 architects and engineers at AE911Truth were demanding a new investigation. By December 2016, the number of A/E petition-signers had swelled to nearly 2,750.

The timing of the fire on Floor 12 exposes NIST's false claim that fire led to the collapse. Below, the four images in the middle column are photographs taken of World Trade Center 7 at four different times in the afternoon of September 11, 2001. The four graphics in the left column are my approximations, using the photographs as a guide, of where—and at what times—a fire was actually burning on Floor 12. And the four graphics in the right column are NIST's ANSYS computer model of where the fires were burning in the building at the same four times. “Note that only window glass breaking times were prescribed in the fire model. The observed fire activity gleaned from the photographs and video were not a model input.” — NCSTAR 1-9, Vol. 2, page 378 [PDF page 444] NIST will not release the input data because doing so, it claims, might “jeopardize public safety.”

Read more.

MAGICAL THERMAL EXPANSION

FRAUD EXPOSED IN NIST WTC 7 REPORTS — NIST heated the floor beams, but not the slab. Since concrete expands at 85% the rate of steel, leaving this expansion out of the calculations of the failure of the shear studs is fraudulent.

NIST used numerous unscientific methods and fraudulent inputs to get the key girder to fail in its computer simulation. For example, NIST arbitrarily added 10% to the temperature results of its fire dynamics simulation (FDS). “Case A used the temperature data as obtained from the FDS simulation. Case B increased the Case A gas temperatures by 10 percent.” — NCSTAR 1A, page 32 [PDF page 74] “[O]nly the fire-induced damage produced by Case B temperatures was carried forward as the initial condition for the building collapse analysis.” — NCSTAR 1A, page 36 [PDF page 78] To get the shear studs on the floor beams to fail, NIST had to assume high steel temperatures. It applied the heat in 1½ seconds over the entire northeast part of Floor 13. This faulty method of calculating temperatures, though, does not allow for the reality of heat dispersal or for the inevitable beam sagging. Interestingly, NIST's model heated the floor beams but not the concrete slab. Since concrete expands at 85% the rate of steel, leaving this expansion out of the calculations of the shear studs failure is fraudulent.

Read more.

MISSING SHEAR STUDS - Shear studs are used to keep steel floor beams and girders in place; they impart stability and strength to buildings. But in its November 2008 final report, NIST reworded its comments on shear studs to give the appearance that none were used on the floor girders.

NIST's final report on the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, issued in November 2008, has many flaws, including blatant fraud. If we go back to its June 2004 Progress Report (and in the actual shop drawings*), NIST referenced shear studs, which are used to keep steel floor beams and girders in place and to impart stability and strength to buildings. But in its final report four years later, NIST reworded its comments on shear studs to give the appearance that none were used on the floor girders. Why would NIST make this fraudulent statement? To know the answer, one needs to understand NIST's collapse theory, which goes like this: 1. The key girder between column 79 and the exterior wall failed at Floor 13. 2. That failure caused the collapse of Floors 13 through 6. 3. Column 79, now unsupported laterally by these floors, buckled and brought down the entire building. Obviously, this scenario posited by NIST sounds more credible if the key girder isn't being held firmly in place with shear studs. So, then, by magically omitting the shear studs, NIST validates its theory that the key girder failed.

Read more.

FICTITIOUS DEBRIS DAMAGE - Obviously, debris large enough to create a 10-story gouge, one-fourth to one-third the width of the building, would have landed in the first floor lobby, along with everything it brought down, including the third-floor lobby.

I first noticed the conundrum that suggested that the “10-story gouge” in the side of WTC 7 could not have actually existed back on September 6, 2006, while I was “debating” with Ryan Mackey in an online forum: See Conundrum in June 2004 Progress Report. NIST's first report, published two years earlier, referred to the “middle 1/4 to 1/3 width of the south face was gouged out from floor 10 to the ground.” It then went on to read: “No heavy debris was observed in the lobby area as the building was exited, primarily white dust coating and black wires hanging from ceiling areas were observed.” — NIST June 2004 Progress Report, Appendix L, page 18 [PDF page 907] See June 2004 Progress Report on the Federal Building and Fire Safety Investigation of the World Trade Center Disaster (NIST SP 1000-5). Obviously, debris large enough to create a 10-story gouge, one-fourth to one-third the width of the building, would have landed in the first floor lobby, along with everything it brought down, including the third-floor lobby. NIST depicted this “damage” in the graphic on page 23 as “Possible region of impact damage” and again on pages 31 and 32 [PDF pages 920 and 921] as “Approximate region of impact damage.”

Also, 9/11 researcher Winston Smith found another statement that conflicted with NIST's 10-story gouge theory in the report on WTC 7 from the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) in Chapter 5 on page 20. It read: “According to the account of a firefighter who walked the 9th floor along the south side following the collapse of WTC1, the only damage to the 9th floor facade occurred at the southwest corner.” See Federal Emergency Management Agency, Chapter 5, WTC 7. Later I found still two more quotes that were in conflict with NIST's theory of the 10-story gouge.

Read more.

NON-EXISTENT DIESEL FUEL FIRE - If there were a fire in this room, smoke would be pouring out through the cooling air exhaust vents. If the louvers were closed, a fire would not have sufficient oxygen to burn hot enough to be a factor in the collapse.

As early as May 2002, the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) acknowledged the problem with the diesel fuel fire hypothesis for the collapse of World Trade Center Building 7, writing: “Although the total diesel fuel on the premises contained massive potential energy, the best hypothesis has only a low probability of occurrence. Further research, investigation, and analysis is needed to resolve this issue.” — FEMA, Chapter 5, page 31 Nonetheless, in its June 2004 Progress Report, NIST continued the diesel fuel fire hypothesis, despite having the data that proved such a fire did not exist in the building: “The presence of a fuel distribution system and the possibility of damage at the south face from WTC 1 debris impact, indicates that fires may have been present on Floor 5.” — NIST Progress Report, Appendix L, page 51 [PDF page 940] NIST's Shyam Sunder misinformed Popular Mechanics in its March 2005 article “Debunking the 9/11 Myths” by telling the writers that there was a fire on Floor 5 of WTC 7 that lasted up to seven hours. There was no fire reported on that floor and no reason to think there was one. The magazine wrote: “Second, a fifth-floor fire burned for up to 7 hours. 'There was no firefighting in WTC 7,' Sunder says. Investigators believe the fire was fed by tanks of diesel fuel that many tenants used to run emergency generators. Most tanks throughout the building were fairly small, but a generator on the fifth floor was connected to a large tank in the basement via a pressurized line. Says Sunder: 'Our current working hypothesis is that this pressurized line was supplying fuel for a long period of time.'” A month later, in April 2005, NIST published an interim report on WTC 7 that said essentially the same thing: “This finding allows for the possibility, though not conclusively, that the fuel may have contributed to a fire on Floor 5.” — NIST Part IIC, April 5, 2005, page 38 Even as late as the first quarter of 2007, the debate about diesel fuel fire was still raging, with talk of 40,000 gallons of diesel fuel playing a role in the destruction of WTC 7. Yet no one had bothered to research the details of the diesel fuel fire hypothesis.

Read more.

9/11 Condensed

9/11 History

Daily Show on 9/11 & It's Effects

Analysis: The FBI & Media Won Trump The Election & I Called It First

Background: How The FBI & Media Won Trump The Elections

This post basically outlines proofs that the FBI won Trump the election and many seemed to think so despite it not being an issue in the media that helped make this a reality. I'm guessing the protesters would get angry? In any case, I called it on twitter and then posted about it (above) after Hillary seemed to agree or come to the same conclusion herself. I'm still right no matter what appears in the media. Russia may have tried and/or succeeded in hacking the election but that interference was not what won Trump the election.

Latest news; Trump retains FBI director Comey Showing Trump Agrees With The Analysis That FBI Won Him The Election

Trump retains FBI Director James Comey, sources say

Huffington Post: Corey Lewandowski Credits FBI Director James Comey With Helping Donald Trump Win“With 11 days to go in this election cycle, something amazing happened.”

MSNBC - Maddow: Trump thanks the FBI director accused of helping his campaign

There was a White House reception yesterday to thank law enforcement officers and first responders who worked on Donald Trump’s inauguration, and the new president seemed especially eager to thank one person in particular. The Washington Post reported:

FBI Director James B. Comey, who infuriated Democrats during the campaign drama over Hillary Clinton’s email, got a pat on the back Sunday from President Trump. […]

“He’s become more famous than me,” Trump said to those ringing the room as Comey strode in his direction. The two men shook hands and as Comey leaned in toward Trump, the president patted him on the back a few times.

If you watch the clip closely, it seems as if Trump may have blown Comey a kiss before encouraging him to cross the room for a presidential embrace.

It wasn’t surprising that Trump’s principal concern was on Comey’s “fame” – the new president seems to prefer to have headlines to himself – but the scene was nevertheless an awkward one.

Congressional Democrats, pollsters, and political scientists agree that were it not for the FBI director’s suspect intervention in the 2016 campaign, Trump would almost certainly not have won the election. Subsequent information from Comey has only enraged Dems further.

Summary/Explanation of what happened;

It's pretty well known that the media pulls alot of fake scandals to drum up the sensationalism to get ratings

Trevor Noah Demonstrates How The Media's Fake Scandals Makes The Candidates THEMSELVES Make Mistakes

Trevor Noah Exposes The Conservative & Liberal Echo Chambers That Have Emerged In America

Daily Show: Media Has Reduced Complex Issues Into Meaningless Debates

Daily Show Exposes CNN, MSNBC & Fox News As The 'Wrongnado Trio Of News'

Daily Show To CNN, MSNBC & Fox News: I Wish You Were Drunk Cause That Would Explain Your Coverage

They even covered up the Iraq war...

Beltway Media Covers Up Reporting On A Bi-Partisan Senate Report Proving We Were Misled Into The Iraq War By The Bush Administration & Jon Stewart Makes Fun Of The Media's Coverup

Jon Stewart Slams The Media for Continuing To Not Report Properly on The Iraq War... AGAIN!

Rachel Maddow Talks About The Bush Dynasty & How The Media Doesn't Talk About The Wars They Have Started

Rachel Maddow On The Iraq War Lies Ignored In Republican Campaign Coverage By The Beltway Media

So when the FBI came out and started up a narrative of an investigation, the media jumped...

How The FBI & Media Won Trump The Elections

The Media's "October Surprise" Is Just Another Big Fake Scandal! (With Stephen Colbert & Seth Meyers)

Of course, you should keep in mind that all this time media has been giving Trump free publicity cause he's interesting/controversial...

Pre-Primary News Coverage of the 2016 Presidential Race: Trump’s Rise, Sanders’ Emergence, Clinton’s Struggle

A new report from Harvard Kennedy School’s Shorenstein Center on Media, Politics and Public Policy analyzes news coverage of the 2016 presidential candidates in the year leading up to the primaries. This crucial period, labeled “the invisible primary” by political scientists, is when candidates try to lay the groundwork for a winning campaign—with media exposure often playing a make or break role.

The report shows that during the year 2015, major news outlets covered Donald Trump in a way that was unusual given his low initial polling numbers—a high volume of media coverage preceded Trump’s rise in the polls. Trump’s coverage was positive in tone—he received far more “good press” than “bad press.” The volume and tone of the coverage helped propel Trump to the top of Republican polls.

The Democratic race in 2015 received less than half the coverage of the Republican race. Bernie Sanders’ campaign was largely ignored in the early months but, as it began to get coverage, it was overwhelmingly positive in tone. Sanders’ coverage in 2015 was the most favorable of any of the top candidates, Republican or Democratic. For her part, Hillary Clinton had by far the most negative coverage of any candidate. In 11 of the 12 months, her “bad news” outpaced her “good news,” usually by a wide margin, contributing to the increase in her unfavorable poll ratings in 2015.

The Shorenstein Center study is based on an analysis of thousands of news statements by CBS, Fox, the Los Angeles Times, NBC, The New York Times, USA Today, The Wall Street Journal, and The Washington Post. The study’s data were provided by Media Tenor, a firm that specializes in the content analysis of news coverage.

&

Confirmed: Network Newscasts Were All-Trump, All The Time In 2015 The media dumps on democracy with exceptionally bad election coverage.

Though that's not complete until you take into account this information;

Bernie Sanders On How Corporate Media Is A Threat to Democracy (With An Explanation On How & Why They Covered Up Bernie ... AND How They Continue To Cover-up Their Coverup)

So between the FBI and the media's bullsh*t we had the chaos necessary to elect Trump (thanks to you both... though if he brings out 9/11 he may turn out to be our best President yet so maybe I shouldn't speak so soon? Of course, if he doesn't bring out the truth about 9/11 (through an independent and transparent investigation) then Trump will be the worst President the United States has ever had (& yes, I'm including white supremacists like Nixon and Presidents such as Andrew Jackson... who I clearly should never have posted about)).

Here is a summary from my past post of left out info in the media;

Here is an article from Politico NOTING that previous email investigation HAD reduced Hillary's polls numbers (i.e. we had historical precedent AND the fact of needing several days for the polls to reflect the FBI's interference in the election).

Politico;

If you take into account newspapers NOT in the American media fold of misinformation for profit (synergy) then we get the idea that there was an idea floating around that media stories and stories created by the FBI IN the media could have an effect on public opinion as well (such as boost voter turnout in high-fear areas, which is what appears to have happened, i.e. the scare tactic through a fake scandal worked!)

Here we see Hillary's poll number go down yet everyone seems to believe the FBI investigation has nothing to do with it! How did they figure that out? Ask a bunch of scared voters?

The Guardian;