{
  "schema": "qaeda.public-claims-ledger.v1",
  "canonical": "https://qaeda.org/claims",
  "updated": "2026-09-02",
  "publication": "Questioning Accepted Ethics, Dogma & Authority",
  "purpose": "Public claim-level ledger for consequential factual assertions, attribution disputes, corrections, and editorial inferences. It is not a substitute for underlying sources.",
  "review_boundary": "Statuses reflect the evidence reviewed by QAEDA as of the ledger update date. Current events may change and source reports may contain unresolved errors or omissions.",
  "statuses": {
    "verified": "Directly established by a strong primary/near-primary artifact or unusually strong convergent evidence for the narrow claim stated.",
    "supported": "Substantially supported by multiple or strong sources, while important limits, sampling issues, or incompleteness remain.",
    "qualified_attribution": "A credible attribution exists, but the underlying primary artifact or exact wording is not fully verified.",
    "unverified": "The reviewed evidence does not currently justify treating the claim as established.",
    "editorial_inference": "QAEDA interpretation or value judgment derived from evidence; it should not be mistaken for a source quotation or settled fact."
  },
  "claims": [
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-001",
      "topic": "Russian anti-war language",
      "claim": "‘Нет войне!’ (‘No to war!’) is a strongly documented emblematic concise slogan of Russian anti-war dissent from 24 February 2022 onward.",
      "status": "verified",
      "confidence": "high",
      "basis": "The provenance-focused source set identifies dated public statements, petitions, protest documentation, graffiti, and later prosecutions involving the wording.",
      "revision_condition": "Revise only if primary-source chronology materially changes the claim’s dating or prominence.",
      "research_theme": "russian-anti-war-resistance",
      "public_routes": ["/articles/russian-anti-war-language", "/research#russian-resistance"]
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-002",
      "topic": "Russian anti-war slogan provenance",
      "claim": "‘Rebel or Die’ was a canonical or established movement-level slogan of Russia’s post-2022 anti-war resistance.",
      "status": "unverified",
      "confidence": "high that current evidence is insufficient",
      "basis": "Several supplied interpretive reports assert movement-level use, but later provenance-focused reports did not locate a securely dated anti-war artifact or canonical Russian wording. Better-documented Russian slogans exist.",
      "revision_condition": "A dated first-generation artifact—such as an original post, protest photograph, manifesto, police record, or contemporaneous report—showing movement-level anti-war use would justify reassessment.",
      "research_theme": "slogan-provenance",
      "public_routes": ["/articles/rebel-or-die-provenance", "/research#slogan-provenance"],
      "correction_id": "QAEDA-COR-001"
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-003",
      "topic": "Agnes Smedley attribution",
      "claim": "The shorter sentence ‘It is either rebel or die’ is attributable to Agnes Smedley in the China context around 1930.",
      "status": "qualified_attribution",
      "confidence": "moderate-high",
      "basis": "Ben Macintyre’s 2020 biography attributes the shorter sentence to Smedley, and accessible 1931 Smedley writing strongly corroborates the context, but the underlying letter/manuscript or archival shelf mark has not yet been located in the reviewed material.",
      "revision_condition": "Promote to verified quotation if the primary Smedley artifact behind the Macintyre attribution is recovered and matches the wording.",
      "research_theme": "slogan-provenance",
      "public_routes": ["/articles/rebel-or-die-provenance"],
      "correction_id": "QAEDA-COR-002"
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-004",
      "topic": "Agnes Smedley attribution",
      "claim": "The complete wording ‘It is either rebel or die. And often it is rebel and die.’ is an authenticated Agnes Smedley quotation.",
      "status": "unverified",
      "confidence": "high that current evidence is insufficient",
      "basis": "The reviewed research locates the full two-clause wording in a 2023 Daniel Tutt essay, while Macintyre’s earlier Smedley attribution stops after the shorter sentence.",
      "revision_condition": "A pre-2023 Smedley primary source or securely sourced archival quotation containing the added sentence would justify reassessment.",
      "research_theme": "slogan-provenance",
      "public_routes": ["/articles/rebel-or-die-provenance"],
      "correction_id": "QAEDA-COR-002"
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-005",
      "topic": "Russian anti-war resistance",
      "claim": "Russian resistance to mobilization and the war was heterogeneous rather than one unified national movement.",
      "status": "supported",
      "confidence": "high",
      "basis": "The source corpus separates street protest, emigration, administrative/legal avoidance, conscientious objection, family activism, unauthorized absence/refusal by serving personnel, and a smaller destructive fringe with different constituencies and goals.",
      "revision_condition": "Revise if stronger systematic research demonstrates a level of centralized organization or ideological unity not reflected in the current corpus.",
      "research_theme": "russian-anti-war-resistance",
      "public_routes": ["/articles/russian-anti-war-language", "/research#russian-resistance"]
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-006",
      "topic": "Russian anti-war repression",
      "claim": "The best-documented anti-war-related coercion in the reviewed Russian source set is state repression directed largely at peaceful dissent, while destructive anti-war acts form a smaller and more heterogeneous category.",
      "status": "supported",
      "confidence": "moderate-high",
      "basis": "The repression report synthesizes human-rights documentation, detention/prosecution data, and later cases, while also warning that destructive-incident totals are difficult to interpret because political motives, fraud, coercion, and proxy recruitment can be conflated.",
      "revision_condition": "Revise if a more comprehensive comparable dataset materially changes the relative scale or classification of anti-war-related coercion and violence.",
      "research_theme": "russian-anti-war-resistance",
      "public_routes": ["/articles/russian-anti-war-language", "/articles/the-civilian-line"]
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-007",
      "topic": "Orange Revelation string forensics",
      "claim": "Removing the inserted ‘@Deep research’ token from the supplied corrupted string and rejoining ‘reve’ + ‘lation’ reconstructs ‘the orange revelation’ exactly.",
      "status": "verified",
      "confidence": "high",
      "basis": "The reconstruction follows directly from the surviving character sequence and requires no spelling substitution.",
      "revision_condition": "Revise only if the original surrounding source context shows that the interruption was not an inserted UI/token artifact.",
      "research_theme": "orange-revelation",
      "public_routes": ["/articles/orange-revelation-epistemic-hygiene", "/research#orange-revelation"]
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-008",
      "topic": "Orange Revelation interpretation",
      "claim": "‘Orange Revelation’ names one established cross-domain historical concept linking the unrelated music, art, gaming, political, architectural, and cultural examples found in search.",
      "status": "unverified",
      "confidence": "high that current evidence is insufficient",
      "basis": "The source-critical report finds multiple independent referents and search collisions. A second report intentionally uses the phrase as an interdisciplinary metaphor, which is interpretive rather than evidence of historical transmission.",
      "revision_condition": "A documented transmission history or explicit source lineage linking the domains would be required to establish a shared historical concept.",
      "research_theme": "orange-revelation",
      "public_routes": ["/articles/orange-revelation-epistemic-hygiene", "/research#orange-revelation"],
      "correction_id": "QAEDA-COR-003"
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-009",
      "topic": "AI terminology",
      "claim": "‘Nanny AI’ is QAEDA’s editorial shorthand for opaque paternalistic AI steering; it is not presented as a defined term from the UAIX Cognitive Liberty Charter.",
      "status": "verified",
      "confidence": "high",
      "basis": "The site’s own cognitive-liberty and anti-Nanny-AI materials explicitly distinguish QAEDA terminology from the external standards reference.",
      "revision_condition": "Revise if QAEDA changes its terminology or the external standard later adopts and defines the same term.",
      "research_theme": "cognitive-liberty",
      "public_routes": ["/cognitive-liberty", "/articles/against-nanny-ai"]
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-CLM-010",
      "topic": "Editorial philosophy",
      "claim": "A source report, bibliography, or institutional label should not be treated as self-authenticating authority; claims remain open to source-level verification and revision.",
      "status": "editorial_inference",
      "confidence": "project principle",
      "basis": "This is QAEDA’s editorial inference from its evidence-first and cognitive-liberty commitments, reinforced by the provenance conflicts found in the supplied research corpus.",
      "revision_condition": "This is a normative editorial principle rather than an empirical proposition; changes require an explicit editorial decision.",
      "research_theme": "critical-inquiry",
      "public_routes": ["/editorial-policy", "/research", "/principles"]
    }
  ],
  "corrections": [
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-COR-001",
      "date": "2026-09-02",
      "topic": "‘Rebel or Die’ as a Russian anti-war slogan",
      "previous_or_source_position": "Several supplied interpretive reports described the phrase as an underground or defining Russian anti-war/partisan slogan.",
      "current_position": "QAEDA does not verify movement-level provenance and now labels the claim unverified unless a dated primary artifact emerges.",
      "reason": "Later provenance-focused research found a much stronger documentary record for ‘Нет войне’, anti-mobilization wording, coded dissent, and survival/refusal language than for ‘Rebel or Die’."
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-COR-002",
      "date": "2026-09-02",
      "topic": "Agnes Smedley quotation scope",
      "previous_or_source_position": "Some later writing presents the full two-clause ‘rebel or die / rebel and die’ wording as Smedley’s quotation.",
      "current_position": "The shorter sentence is a qualified Smedley attribution through Ben Macintyre; the added sentence remains unauthenticated to Smedley in the reviewed evidence.",
      "reason": "The primary Smedley artifact behind the shorter attribution remains unidentified, and the complete two-clause wording was located later in the source trail."
    },
    {
      "id": "QAEDA-COR-003",
      "date": "2026-09-02",
      "topic": "‘Orange Revelation’ as one cross-domain concept",
      "previous_or_source_position": "One supplied report deliberately universalizes the phrase as an interdisciplinary archetype.",
      "current_position": "QAEDA preserves that as metaphor while rejecting it as proof of one historical referent or transmission chain.",
      "reason": "The source-critical investigation finds multiple unrelated exact and near-exact uses, plus search/OCR false friends."
    }
  ]
}