Why Evolution is True is a blog written by Jerry Coyne, centered on evolution and biology but also dealing with diverse topics like politics, culture, and cats.
The other day I showed photos of a mallard hen who came to the pond on Wednesday and whose bill markings were strikingly similar to that of Vashti, the hen who departed with her brood of seven a week before last Tuesday. Her behavior, her immediate bonding with Armon, and bill markings all combine to identify her as Vashti, whose brood likely perished after her exit. So it’s bittersweet that she returned again: sadness for the ducklings loss combined with joy and confidence that she’ll breed again. If she does, can we keep her here this time?
Anyway, I attach a few more photos showing a match between Vashti’s bill markings (taken before she fled) and the markings of the “new duck”. Some people were dubious about the hen’s identity, but I’m going with Vashti.
Vashti’s bill is distinguished, on its top side, by a black patch, then a break before the tip, which is again marked with black. Here it is:
Vashti again:
Top of the bill and left side new duck. Notice the two black patches extending ventrally from the left side of the top marking—same as above.
Top of the bill and right side, new duck
The top is a match, and, as I showed last time, so is the right side. Here’s the right side of the new duck again. Notice the match with the photo above: a black patch on the side with a line of speckles to its rear:
New duck, right side:
Given the huge variance in pigmentation of bills among hens, which you’d have to see for yourself to appreciate, the above is enough for me. Our new hen is Vashti. But I’ll also show the left side, for which the photos are not quite as good.
Vashti, left side of bill. There are not many markings but a few black dots below the nostril:
New duck, left side of bill. Notice the line of about five dots below the nostril—same as above.
It’s Vashti, who clearlymade her way back to the familiar pond after losing her brood. There is ample time for her to nest and incubate her eggs again, so I am feeding her a lot to prompt that. She’s bonded with Armon, who never left the pond, and they are showing bonding and courtship behaviors. I am pretty sure she will nest and breed again.
This would not be the first time we’ve had double-brooding here. When Honey stole Dorothy’s brood, getting a batch of 16 to take care of, Dorothy eventually re-nested and produced her own brood, which she did rear to fledging.
Here’s a classic photo of Honey with her mixed brood of 16, half of them ducknapped. She was a great mome, and all of these ducklings fledged. “But isn’t that evolutionarily maladaptive?”, you ask. Perhaps, unless Dorothy and Honey were related. I have no idea if they were, but I think it’s simply a case of a maternal instinct that was coopted, like humans adopting unrelated babies.
Well, brothers and sisters, friends and comrades, this is the last batch of photos I have. If you’re feeling generous and have some good wildlife photos, well, you know what to do.
Today’s lot comes from Ephraim Heller: they are manakins and tanagers from Trinidad and Tobago. Ephraim’s captions are indented, and you can enlarge the photos by clicking on them.
Today we have photos of manakins and tanagers that I photographed on my February visit to Trinidad and Tobago.
The three manakin species in these photographs all engage in lekking. Females choose a partner at the lek, mate, and then depart to build a nest and raise chicks entirely on their own. Males contribute only sperm. This behavior places intense sexual selection pressure on males, driving the evolution of exotic plumage, acrobatic movements, and multi-male performances. I make no comment on potential parallels in human behavior.
Blue-backed manakin (Chiroxiphia pareola) males engage in cooperative lekking. Two males — typically an older dominant individual and a younger subordinate — perform a dance in which they jump over each other on a branch. The female observes, and when she is sufficiently engaged, the subordinate male withdraws and the dominant male completes the mating. In these photos you see one of the males perched on the lekking branch and then performing the jump.
JAC: Here’s a video showing a related lekking species, the Blue manakin (Chiroxiphia caudata) and their remarkable courtship dance. Look at those males lined up, each trying to show he’s a better jumper than the others!
Each white-bearded manakin (Manacus manacus) male clears a small patch of forest floor down to bare earth and maintains one or more bare sticks above it as perches. The display involves rapid leaps between these sticks and the ground accompanied by a shockingly loud cracking sound – it sounds like someone snapping their fingers right next to your ear. It’s produced by the wings connecting above the back, which is enabled by a limb muscle, the scapulohumeralis caudalis, that is the fastest skeletal muscle in any vertebrate. Here you see two white-bearded manakins perched on their lekking branches and preparing to jump to the ground.
JAC: I also added a video of the white-bearded manakin courtship:
The golden-headed manakin (Ceratopipra erythrocephala) male’s lek display includes a “moonwalk” in which it slides backward along a perch. Sadly, I didn’t observe the moonwalk. In these photos the male has the bright yellow head, and you can see a female behind the male in the second photo.
JAC: Here’s a golden-headed manakin male courting, though I can’t really say it’s a “moonwalk.” They also pop their wings.
This gorgeous bay-headed tanager (Tangara gyrola) stopped me dead in my tracks. It has microstructures in its feathers that scatter light to intensify its hues. In addition, a hidden layer of white or black feathers beneath the outer plumage acts as a reflective backing, boosting the brightness and saturation of the visible colors:
The palm tanager (Thraupis palmarum) is one of the most common birds in Trinidad. The second photo is of the nest, which was conveniently located in a planter on our hotel’s balcony:
White-lined tanager (Tachyphonus rufus) males are glossy black, while females are rufous.
I accidentally hit “publish” instead of “save” when I was preparing today’s Hili dialogue (most of it got done yesterday afternoon), so subscribers might have gotten an incomplete email yesterday and none today.
If you want to read the completed one, click on the screenshot below.
Welcome to the Lusty Month of May! It’s May 1, 2026, and we should all be singing this song from “Camelot”. This version of “The Lusty Month of May’ comes from the stage cast and is sung by Julie Andrews, who unaccountably declined to appear in the movie and was replaced by Vanessa Redgrave.
Apparently the British equivalent, “No Trousers Day,” was three months ago, and a lot of people rode the tube sans trousers (“pants” in the UK means “underpants”). Here’s a video:
A picture of the returned Vashti. What a sweet hen! Pictures will follow shortly to address the doubters.
Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the April 1 Wikipedia page.
Da Nooz:
*I don’t like redistricting–creating new Congressional districts and often new seats in the House–unless it’s based on changes in population size and density. There are mathematically sophisticated ways of redistricting that divide up states based purely on population numbers. Now, however, it’s often done to create ethnic “voter equity” or to increase one party’s seats in Congress. I don’t like either form of gerrymandering, and now, according to the NYT, the Democrats are regretting having started the process a decade ago.
Their party began a major push for independent commissions to draw congressional districts after President Trump and Republicans swept into power in 2017. Democrats, panicked about Republicans’ structural gains after the 2010 census, succeeded in enacting such commissions in Colorado, Michigan and Virginia, while Republicans mostly kept politically minded state legislators in charge of drawing maps in red states.
Now Democrats are finding that their old good-government policies have become bad politics.
Their idealistic push for fairness is, it turns out, no match for the Republicans’ maximalist redistricting effort. The independent commissions that Democrats pushed for eight years ago, along with ones in Washington State and California that predated Mr. Trump’s rise, have complicated the party’s redistricting fight.
After the Supreme Court’s ruling on Wednesday to further weaken the Voting Rights Act, a decision likely to lead to a rush of new maps before the 2028 election if not this year, blue-state Democrats are finding themselves regretting that they had sought to give away redistricting power to outside commissions.
“One of the lessons of the Trump era is a failure of imagination about how many norms they would break,” said Phil Weiser, the Democratic attorney general of Colorado who backed his state’s independent redistricting referendum in 2018 and is now supporting a ballot initiative to undo it. “You could say we should have been thinking ahead. We didn’t foresee this.”
At Mr. Trump’s urging, Republican lawmakers in the last year have redrawn congressional maps to help their party in Texas, Missouri and North Carolina. Democrats responded in California and Virginia by asking voters to undo past referendums that created independent redistricting bodies. In both blue states, voters agreed.
Then came the events of this week, when the Supreme Court ruling appeared to give Republicans new opportunities and Florida Republicans passed a new map designed to flip four Democratic seats.
I repeat: there should be no redistricting except to balance population sizes among Congressional districts. The Republicans started the latest round of violating that principle, but now the Democrats are catching up. It’s the tragedy of the commons, with the commons being states. Who knows what effect this will have on the midterms. I still think the House will flip to Democratic in November, but I’m not betting on it.
Louisiana Gov. Jeff Landry (R) told Republican House candidates Wednesday that he plans to suspend next month’s primary elections so state lawmakers can pass a new congressional map first, according to two people with knowledge of the calls.
The move follows a Supreme Court decision earlier in the day that found Louisiana had unlawfully discriminated by race when it created a second majority-Black congressional district under legal pressure. A new Louisiana map would position Republicans to gain one or two seats in the midterms as they fight to hold their narrow majority in the House.
A spokesperson for Landry declined to comment on his plans for the primary. But the governor, along with Louisiana Attorney General Liz Murrill (R), said in a statement Thursday that the Supreme Court’s decision no longer requires the state to hold “congressional elections under the current map.”
“Yesterday’s historic Supreme Court victory for Louisiana has an immediate consequence for the State,” Landry and Murrill said in the statement. “We are working together with the Legislature and the Secretary of State’s office to develop a path forward.”
The 6-3 decision limited a key provision of the landmark Voting Rights Act and could lead to Black Democrats across the South losing their House seats. Most states are unlikely to be able to redraw districts in time for the November midterm elections, but Louisiana could be one of the exceptions.
Election officials sent ballots to overseas voters weeks ago. It’s unclear whether the governor’s suspension would apply only to primaries for the six House seats, or include other elections, including the heated Senate primary that pits Sen. Bill Cassidy (R) against Rep. Julia Letlow (R). Louisiana has six House seats, two of which are held by Democrats.
If Landry suspends the House primaries but not other contests, primary voters would have to go to
Here are Louisiana’s congressional districts, which are clearly gerrymandered. If you go to the article link above, you’ll see they match almost exactly the area with a proportion of blacks above 50%. Apparently the Republicans want to dismantle that, pronto.
Maine Gov. Janet Mills on Thursday dropped her bid for the U.S. Senate, pointing to a lack of campaign funds to keep up in one of the most competitive races in the country that quickly became a reflection of an internal party debate over which candidates can win in high-profile contests.
The move now thrusts political newcomer Graham Platner, an oyster farmer almost no one knew a year ago, as the expected Democratic front-runner against longtime Republican Sen. Susan Collins, whose seat Democrats are targeting in their effort to win control of the closely divided Senate.
“While I have the drive and passion, commitment and experience, and above all else – the fight – to continue on, I very simply do not have the one thing that political campaigns unfortunately require today: the financial resources,” Mills said in a statement. “That is why today I have made the incredibly difficult decision to suspend my campaign for the United States Senate.”
. . . Mills, a two-term governor and longtime Maine politician, was seen as one of Democrats’ top 2026 recruits when she entered the Senate race last year. She had the backing of Senate Minority Leader Chuck Schumer and prominent left-leaning advocacy groups hoping to unseat Collins in the chamber, which has 53 Republicans, 45 Democrats and two independents who caucus with the Democrats.
. . . Meanwhile, Schumer and Democratic Senatorial Campaign Committee Chair Sen. Kirsten Gillibrand, both of New York, said they would work with Platner to defeat Collins.
“Our North Star is winning a Democratic Senate majority, and over the past year, Senate Democrats have carved out multiple paths to do that,” their statement said.
Two male runners who were discovered fraudulently competing on behalf of female colleagues in a top South African marathon have been disqualified and could face two-year bans from the event, along with the two women.
The two women runners swapped their bibs with the two men, who both finished within the top 10 in the women’s half-marathon at the Two Oceans Marathon in Cape Town last Sunday, initially denying those slots to two female runners.
But the cheating was discovered by a marathon board member, and the men were disqualified from their 7th and 10th place finishes. Two women were belatedly recognized instead.
Larissa Parekh was accused of having Luke Jacobs run on her behalf, and Tegan Garvey was accused of having Nic Bradfield run on her behalf, marathon board member Stuart Mann said. All four runners face disciplinary action that could include two-year bans from the event, Mann said.
The annual Two Oceans race is one of South Africa’s iconic marathons and includes a 56-kilometer (34.7-mile) ultramarathon and a 21.1-kilometer (13.1-mile) half-marathon. The event attracts over 16,000 participants and finishing among the top 10 is a significant achievement for most runners.
Click the screenshot to go to an Instagram report. One of the men posted a picture of himself (below) on social media wearing a woman’s bib, which revealed the deception. I guess that both men and women ran together, which might make it harder to detect that the two imposters were in fact men. What it shows, of course, is the average advantage that biological men have over biological women in sports. The women who gave their bibs to men should be banned for at least two years.
*A gigantic Steller sea lion (Eumetopias jubatus) named “Chonkers” is grabbing all the headlines in San Francisco. where he’s often found chilling on Pier 39.. Weighing in at a full ton, he’s twice the weight of the usual California sea lions (Zalophus californianus).
San Francisco’s newest star isn’t part of a show, and you won’t find him at the ballpark or the basketball court, but he’s large and in charge – literally.
“Chonkers,” an estimated 2,000-pound Steller sea lion at Pier 39, is attracting visitors from far and wide.
“He’s massive,” Linda Helkin of Brisbane, Australia, said Tuesday. “Just lying there, didn’t have a care in the world.”
“Chonkers” is noticeably larger than the California sea lions that usually hang out at Pier 39. Large adult male California sea lions generally weigh between 800 to 1,000 pounds, while Steller sea lions are about double in size.
“Chonkers” has been hanging around Pier 39 for the last month or so. According to the Pier 39 harbor masters, he’s come to visit occasionally over the last few years.
Pier 39’s Sheila Chandor said he’s likely here now because the bay offers plenty to feed on.
“Right now, the fact that he’s staying this long means that there’s a lot of food source close by to where we are,” Chandor said. “It’s a good sign. It means the bay is healthy, we’ve got plenty of fish around.”
According to the harbor masters, the best time to get a look at “Chonkers” is in the morning until roughly 9:30 a.m. and in the later afternoon and evening. During the middle of the day, he’s usually out in the bay fishing.
Here’s a video. Look at that chonk!
Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is attentive to the garden, but I suspect she’s speaking metaphorically:
Hili: The same thing again.
Andrzej: What do you mean?
Hili: Weeds grow faster than grass.
In Polish:
Hili: Znów to samo.
Ja: Co masz na myśli?
Hili: Chwasty rosną szybciej niż trawa.
Masih applauds the expulsion of the Iranian football chief from Canada. I’m not sure I agree that sports should be a political football (pardon the pun).
Iran football chief expelled from Canada in airport showdown over IRGC ties!
I welcome the deportation of Mehdi Taj from Canada sends alongside millions of Iranians because we are united against sportswashing.
From Luana. It’s Springtime at the U of C, and the pro-Pals have created their parallel university, complete with public prayers:
🚨 Day Three of UChicago’s “Popular University” featured ICE intervention training, a student repression panel with recently arrested students, a Rojava reportback, “Palestine Before 10/7″ with FJP, and “Anti-Black Structural Violence + Radical Resistance.” pic.twitter.com/Fvm34Fj3eI
🚨 Day Two of UChicago’s “Popular University for Gaza” has professors teaching “Iran War + US Empire,” the Grenadan Revolution, ICE resistance, political prisoners in “Babylon,” and more.
From J. K. Rowling, who noticed that people have trouble saying that the Golders Green attack in London affectsed Jews. Even mentioning the affected group is apparently verboten:
Why do leaders of the Greens have such difficulty naming the particular demographic likely to be most ‘shaken’ and ‘affected’ by two men from their community having their throats cut on a London street? pic.twitter.com/sKMA4p1bre
After writing the lyrics to "Song of the Murdered Jewish People," this Jewish poet, Ithak Katzenelson was himself gassed. You can hear the song here: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HrWQ…
As I mentioned, a hen mallard came into Botany Pond yesterday and quickly took up with Armon, with him being protective and driving away other drakes. Could this have been Vashti returning after she left the pond with her brood? The only way to tell is to compare bill photos, as hens have identifying dark marks on their bill. So I did the comparison, which you can see below.
Vashti: left side of bill (on nest)
New hen: left side of bill. same black markings on upper bill, black bill tip, and freckles on left side of bill:
Vashti: right side of bill:
New hen: right side of bill. This is the most dispositive to me: note the cloudy darkness on the right side with a small black clump on the bottom, along with the line of “freckles” extending ventrally.
This is good enough for me, and I am calling her “Vashti” again. Moreover, she’s back with Armon (they bonded very quickly after the new hen arrived at the pond yesterday), and they were showing breeding behaviors this morning (head bowing, etc.). My guess is that Vashti is going to essay a second brood.
The sad part is that Vashti almost certainly lost her brood after wandering away from Botany Pond, and came back to try again. The good bit is that she’s trying again, and I will be here to oversee the process again. And Armon is overseeing everything.
The degree of anti-Jewish violence in the UK has escalated since October, 2023, and has been especially noticeable in the last six months. Here are the antisemitic incidents that Grok describes, including the stabbing yesterday.
23 March 2026 – Golders Green arson: Four ambulances belonging to the Jewish volunteer medical charity Hatzola Northwest were deliberately set on fire in the car park of a synagogue in Golders Green (a major Jewish neighbourhood in north London). Police treated it as a suspected antisemitic hate crime; multiple arrests followed.
Mid-April 2026 – Series of attempted arsons on Jewish sites in north London:
15 April: A brick and two bottles (believed to contain petrol) were thrown at Finchley Reform Synagogue.
Around 17–18 April: Suspected arson attacks targeted a building in Hendon previously used by a Jewish charity and Kenton United Synagogue in Harrow (where a teenage boy reportedly smashed a window and threw a lit bottle inside).
Late April (reported around 27 April): A suspected arson attack on a Jewish memorial wall in Golders Green.
Counter-terrorism police linked some of these to possible paid criminal actors (with speculation of Iran-related motives in some reporting) and made multiple arrests across the incidents.
29 April 2026 – Golders Green stabbing (ongoing investigation as of 30 April): Two Jewish men (aged 34 and 76) were stabbed in the street in Golders Green shortly after 11 a.m. Police declared it a terrorist incident, stating the suspect (a 45-year-old man arrested on suspicion of attempted murder) appeared to be “hunting for anyone visibly Jewish.” Both victims were hospitalized in stable condition. The suspect also allegedly turned the knife on officers.
This was combined with persistent accusations of antisemitism in the Labour Party under Jeremy Corbyn, Those accusations againt Labpir seem to have eroded under PM Keir Starmer, whose wife and family are Jewish and the kids are being raised Jewish though Starmer himself is an atheist. Yet, as the Free Press article asserts (see below), Starmer is “failing Britain’s Jews” through inaction against incidents like the ones above. First, an archived article from the Torygraph (click to read), showing journalist Suzanne Moore (not Jewish) fed up with the violence:
I should have said “the stabbing of two of our own”. I am not Jewish, but these are our people in our streets, in the city in which I live. Today’s attack is utterly shaming and enraging, and the latest in a line of appalling anti-Semitic crimes. At this point, I just don’t want to hear any more excuses about why this is happening to this tiny minority.
I don’t want to hear more about Palestine, Zionism, Netanyahu, colonialism, “mental health” or “diversity”. Where have these endless, spiralling discussions got us? We are dancing on the head of a pin about whether anti-Semitism is a form of racism, when it so obviously is.
We are now at the point where ambulances are firebombed, and the leader of the Green Party has the gall to ask whether the problem faced by the Jewish community is simply a “perception” of being unsafe. When random Jews are subject to attack, no one asks their position on the Jewish state before spilling their blood, do they? Or where they stand on Gaza?
Where I live in Hackney, east London, Hasidic Jews and Muslims live alongside each other. Many of the local Haredi schools resemble fortresses with 24-hour security. No other community is living like this. Churches and mosques do not need armed guards, and if they did, we would see this situation for what it is – a national emergency.
In the past few years, long before October 7, waves of open anti-Semitism have crashed over us. Labour twisted itself up over it, and those they expelled went straight to the Greens.
Killing Jews in their place of worship in Manchester was shocking enough, but just like the dreadful massacre in Bondi Beach, no one was really that surprised. Jews don’t stab themselves, do they? Yet there is this disgusting underlying sentiment that somehow they have always had it coming. Jews are always held somehow responsible for the murderous violence against them.
She has a point. Jews are not stabbing Palestinians, driving their cars into crowds of Arabs, or burning mosques. She calls for action, as does Jonathan Sacerdoti below, who gives a number of suggestions. And nobody asks the people who are attacked what their views are on Zionism or Netanyahu. This alone shows that it’s not Zionism or the current Israeli PM that’s prompting the violence: the target is Jews, pure and simple. As Moore says, “We need to protect each other, or we’re done for.”
The Green Party of England and Wales—it would be called “progressive Left” in the U.S.—has been accused by many, including at least two of my non-Jewish British friends (as well as by Suzanna Moore above) as being a refuge for British antisemites. One of the accused, Zack Polanski, has been leader of the Green Party for nearly a year, and happens to be Jewish, but Brendan O’Neill at the Spectator (not Jewish) calls out Polanski for weaselspeak. (Click below to read.)
Again, a few paragraphs:
Hey, Jews – have you ever considered the possibility that you’re making a fuss over nothing? That a few petrol bombs through the windows of your synagogues is not really a big deal? That your feelings of fear after two Jews were slain in Manchester on Yom Kippur and Jewish property was incinerated in Golders Green and Jews were spat at for wearing a Star of David pendant in public might be a tad overblown?
That’s what I heard when Zack Polanski wondered out loud this week if Britain’s Jews are experiencing ‘actual unsafety’ or just a ‘perception of unsafety’. It is one of the most tone-deaf, pitiless sentences I have heard a politician utter. The Jews of London were terrorised all last week. There were attempted firebombings at numerous synagogues. And here is the leader of the Green Party asking if Jews, the poor dears, merely feel unsafe. Callous doesn’t cover it.
It was an Israeli journalist who asked Polanski about the recent wave of Jewphobic violence. To be fair, Polanski, who is himself Jewish, did express concern about ‘the rise in anti-Semitic attacks’. But it felt perfunctory. He swiftly moved on to ‘the conversation’ he thinks we should be having. ‘There is a conversation to be had about whether it’s a perception of unsafety or whether it’s actual unsafety’, he said. He generously acknowledged that ‘neither are acceptable’. But there it was, out in the open, that slippery left instinct to minimise Jewish pain.
There is no other way to interpret his Kafkaesque formulation: ‘perception of unsafety’. That turgid piece of academese, which will doubtless go down a storm with the keffiyeh-wearing PhDs who swell the ranks of the Green party, seems expressly designed to downplay Jewish fear. Are you really at risk from the fire and the fists of the Jew-haters in our midst, or are you just imagining it? That was the toxic essence of Polanski’s unfeeling remarks.
. . . This isn’t all in Jews’ heads. They aren’t dumbly falling for a fear narrative. Their safety really has been compromised by the post-7 October frenzy of Jew hate. Imagine if petrol bombs were being thrown at mosques and Muslims had been murdered on Eid by a knife-wielding lowlife. Do you think Polanski would be holding forth on whether Muslims really are unsafe or are merely suffering from a ‘perception of unsafety’? Every single one of us knows he would not.
I am not keen on the word “Jewphobic” (it’s not a phobia; the word “antisemitism” will do nicely), but what’s going on in the UK is not simply a “perception of unsafety”. It is unsafety! Look at the incidents above, all of which happened in the last two months. And is being stabbed simply a “perception” of being pierced with a knife?
Finally, to Labour PM Starmer himself. Today’s Free Press has an article critical of the inaction of Labour; the author is Alex Hearn, a co-director of Labour Against Antisemitism.
The “J’accuse” paragraphs:
Within hours of the stabbing, Britain’s prime minister, Keir Starmer, called the attack “deeply concerning.” He said we must be “absolutely clear in our determination to deal with any of these offenses.” I have been a Labour Party supporter for decades and I have to say plainly: The prime minister’s platitudes are not enough. They have not been enough for some time.
This is the latest in a huge surge of antisemitic attacks in London in recent months. Only last week, a viral video circulated of an Orthodox Jewish man harassed in the street and called a baby killer. Weeks before, ambulances belonging to a Jewish charity were set on fire. Each time, the prime minister says “Antisemitism has no place in the UK,” or some similar platitude.
But a man is judged by his deeds, and unfortunately, Keir Starmer is failing British Jews. On his watch, Jews are struggling to recognize the tolerant country we once knew. As everyday racism has been accommodated and tolerated, we’re long past expecting action.
On Wednesday, Britain’s chief rabbi, Sir Ephraim Mirvis, said that “words of condemnation are no longer sufficient.” He called for “meaningful action.” The Israeli foreign ministry was even more blunt: “The UK government can no longer claim this is under control.” The Israelis are right, and they are saying what most Jews in Britain now know to be true.
Consider what British Jews have seen happen in their country in the last three years. Ever since October 7, they have watched streets close in central London, week after week, for marches characterized by racism and hate. Each time, the elimination of the world’s only Jewish state is chanted as a moral demand.
They have watched sitting members of Parliament attend those marches, where being “visibly Jewish” is deemed a provocation. They have watched as smashed windows of Jewish businesses are waved away in the pages of The Guardian as “small acts of petty symbolism.” They have seen an Israeli soccer team’s fans banned from Birmingham over concocted charges of hooliganism. They have watched students at Britain’s finest universities abuse Jewish professors and students, helping to create a culture where one in five British students said they would not house share with a Jew. They have watched parliamentary candidates campaign on Gaza, celebrating October 7. They have watched synagogues implement airport-style security, and their children required to undergo security briefings for kindergarten.
And they have watched a Labour government respond with the language of management, and with total inaction. “Concern.” “Determination.” “Resolve.” The vocabulary of bland press releases and the hope the news cycle will move on before anyone asks what, exactly, is being done to prevent the next attack.
But in the five years since Starmer took over as leader of the Labour Party and in the nearly two years since he has been prime minister, the problem has only gotten worse. Instead of just the Labour Party needing cleaning up, the entire country does. The prime minister has not summoned the heads of the universities where Jewish students have been spat at and chased. He has not used his office to name the Islamist ideology that has driven a series of recent terror plots. He has not demanded the proscription of organizations whose leaders openly celebrated October 7. He has not designated the Islamic Revolutionary Guard Corps (IRGC), Iran’s version of the SS, as a terror group in the UK. And he cannot stop his own MPs from joining the hate rallies.
The last paragraph has a number of suggestions that Starmer could heed to lessen the antisemitism—or at least the acts that pervasive antisemitism has prompted. (I use “pervasive” antisemitism deliberately, as that’s exactly what seems to be true of the UK.) To me, some of the suggestions abrogate American-style free speech, but Britain has no First Amendment. That said, the leadership needs to cultivate a climate of tolerance, and stop having the law demonize Islamophobia but go soft on antisemitism.
Finally, this seven-minute BBC Berkshire video featuring Jonathan Sacerdoti (a pro-Jewish brodacaster) has caused a kerfuffle on social media. People object to the interviewer speaking over Sacerdoti, who ticks off a list of antisemitic incidents and criticizes Starmer for inaction. Finally, the interviewer actually mutes Sacerdoti’s microphone when he criticizes the Green Party. The man is quite eloquent, and offers tangible suggestions to erode public antisemitism, but either the broadcaster wanted to end the segment for political reasons or simply was in a rush to wrap things up. You be the judge. But muting the microphone is not the way to go. (In my view, the interviewer is pushing back not only on what Sacerdoti “characterizes” which is not a characterization but a description of reality, and also lauds the BBC’s evenhandedness, though most people recognize that the Beeb has been anti=Israel since October 7.)
As for stopping antisemitism, well, Sacerdoti’s suggestions will make public acts of antisemitism less frequent, but will it eliminate the sentiments behind them? And why is this stuff now fulminating in the UK?
Welcome to Thursday, April 30, 2026, with May nearly upon us. It’s also National Bugs Bunny Day, celebrating the day the dwatted wabbit made his first appearance in 1938. And here it is, in “Porky’s Hare Hunt.” Bugs first appears 46 second in, as wily as ever.
Finally, there’s a Google Doodle today celebrating Route 66: America’s most famous highway (and its remaining attractions), a road that’s largely been replaced and subsumed into other roads: It’s celebrated today because, as Wikipedia says, “The numerical designation 66 was assigned to the Chicago-to-Los Angeles route on April 30, 1926.”
When you click on the screenshot above, it shows the route of that road, which extends from Santa Monica in California to good old Chicago:
Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the April 30 Wikipedia page.
President Trump has instructed aides to prepare for an extended blockade of Iran, U.S. officials said, targeting the regime’s coffers in a high-risk bid to compel a nuclear capitulation Tehran has long refused.
In recent meetings, including a Monday discussion in the Situation Room, Trump opted to continue squeezing Iran’s economy and oil exports by preventing shipping to and from its ports. He assessed that his other options—resume bombing or walk away from the conflict—carried more risk than maintaining the blockade, officials said.
Yet continuing the blockade also prolongs a conflict that has driven up gas prices, hurt Trump’s poll numbers and further darkened Republicans’ prospects in the midterm elections. It has also caused the lowest number of transits through the Strait of Hormuz since the war began.
Since ending the major bombing campaign in an April 7 cease-fire, Trump has repeatedly walked back from escalating the conflict, opening space for diplomacy after earlier threatening to destroy the entirety of Iranian civilization. But he still wants to tighten the grip on the regime until it caves to his key demand: dismantling all of Iran’s nuclear work. On Monday, Trump told aides that Iran’s three-step offer to reopen the Strait of Hormuz and save nuclear talks for the final phase proved Tehran wasn’t negotiating in good faith, The Wall Street Journal reported.
For now, Trump is comfortable with an indefinite blockade, which he wrote Tuesday on Truth Social is pushing Iran toward a “State of Collapse.” A senior U.S. official said the blockade is demonstrably crushing Iran’s economy—it is straining to store its unsold oil—and sparked fresh outreach by the regime to Washington.
Trump’s decision represents a new phase of sorts of the war and highlights the fact that the president, who always seeks a quick and salable victory, is devoid of a silver bullet.
Unilaterally stopping the fight offers a quick exit to the conflict and relief to the U.S. and global economies. But Iran’s proposal last weekend would have allowed Tehran to set the terms of that off-ramp.
Restarting hostilities, meanwhile, would further weaken a battered Iran, but it would likely react by wreaking more havoc on Gulf energy infrastructure, bolstering the costs of the war. The blockade shrinks the Islamic Republic’s funds but commits U.S. forces to a longer deployment in the Middle East—with no guarantee the regime capitulates.
“Iran is calculating that its ability to withstand and circumvent the blockade outstrips the U.S. interest in preventing a wider energy crisis and potentially a global recession,” said Suzanne Maloney, an Iran expert and vice president of the Brookings Institution’s foreign policy program. “A regime that slaughtered its own citizens to silence protests in January is fully prepared to impose economic hardships on them now.”
Iran is making that calculation, but it’s risking political suicide in the hopes that the Hormuz blockage will wreak havoc on the entire world. This, however, is probably the savviest move that Trump can make, and there’s always a chance—albeit a small one—that a population forced to suffer economic hardship on top of political oppression could revolt. But as we know, the theocracy could give a rat’s patootie about the well-being of the Iranian people.
*It’s Noon in Israelexplains the significance of the UAE’s withdrawal from OPEC.
It’s Wednesday, April 29, and the United Arab Emirates has announced its departure from the Organization of the Petroleum Exporting Countries (OPEC). As the group’s third-largest producer, the move is monumental. By way of comparison, it is akin to a permanent member of the Security Council leaving the United Nations—except, of course, the world actually cares about what OPEC has to say.
. . .So, why now?
Well, the oil market is vastly different from that of the 1970s. The first blow to the OPEC monopoly was that the U.S. now ranks among the world’s top three exporters of crude following the shale revolution in the 2010s. The U.S.’s impending control over the reserves of one of OPEC’s founding members, Venezuela, is another, and Operation Roaring Lion is the third. During the recent conflict, production policy was coordinated through OPEC, but in some ways it was every oil nation for itself: the Saudis had their contingency for bypassing the Strait of Hormuz, and the UAE had its own.
The exit also resolves a long-standing tension between the UAE’s rapidly expanding production capacity—which targeted 5 million barrels per day by 2027—and restrictive cartel quotas that forced the nation to operate roughly 30 percent below its capability. This is reflective of a fundamental difference in interests: Saudi Arabia requires crude prices near $80 per barrel to balance its national budget and fund Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman’s ambitious plans for the country.
Conversely, the UAE possesses a vastly more diversified economy and massive sovereign wealth funds. The UAE’s overall economic health is tied more closely to global macroeconomic growth than to the nominal price of a barrel of oil. By exiting OPEC and actively increasing global supply to lower energy costs, the UAE can deliberately stimulate the global economy, curb Western inflation and thereby bolster the returns of its own massive international investment portfolios.
Perhaps most interestingly, the withdrawal signals a deepening geopolitical rift with Saudi Arabia. Though the two nations have long clashed through proxies in Yemen and Sudan, the UAE is now charting a more permanent, independent course—one that hugs the U.S. and Israeli coasts rather than being bound to the Saudi winds. This isn’t just speculation; MBZ’s top adviser, often considered his mouthpiece, has grown increasingly vocal about his disappointment with the Arab League and the Gulf Cooperation Council. But even when the relationship isn’t overtly adversarial, the UAE is clearly finished with regional conformity.
Well, this answers the questions I had yesterday about the significance of the UAE’s withdrawal. As for the price at the pump, it portends a decline, which is not that important to me but may well be to truckers and some impecunious consumers.
James B. Comey, the former F.B.I. director, was indicted on Tuesday over a social media post, signaling a renewed effort by the Justice Department to pursue charges against him after its bid last year ended in failure.
A federal grand jury in North Carolina charged Mr. Comey with making a threat against the president and transmitting a threat across state lines, according to court records.
The case, which centers on an image of seashells that Mr. Comey posted on Instagram, is the latest salvo in the department’s tortured efforts to satisfy the demands of President Trump to go after longtime targets of his wrath. Under the acting attorney general, Todd Blanche, the department has sought to accelerate Mr. Trump’s retribution campaign after the president fired Attorney General Pam Bondi, in part, over his dissatisfaction with her effectiveness in bringing cases against his perceived enemies.
Mr. Comey vowed to fight the case.
“I’m still innocent, I’m still not afraid and I still believe in the independent federal judiciary, so let’s go,” he said in a video statement posted online. Mr. Comey urged Americans to “keep the faith.”
. . .The new Comey charge stems from an incident nearly a year ago, when the former F.B.I. director, vacationing on the North Carolina coast, posted a photograph on social media showing seashells arranged to say “86 47,” combining the slang term “86,” often used to mean dismiss or remove, with an apparent reference to Mr. Trump, the country’s 47th president.
After an uproar ensued over the post, Mr. Comey deleted it, saying that he did not know that it could be seen as having a violent connotation and that he opposed violence of any kind.
Members of the administration, as well as Mr. Trump’s family, declared that the meaning of “86” was to kill, and that the seashell message amounted to a threat to assassinate the president.
According to court records, the case was assigned to Judge Louise W. Flanagan of the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of North Carolina, an appointee of President George W. Bush whose courthouse is in New Bern, N.C.
I simply can’t believe that Comey meant “kill Trump” when he used “8647”. It’s much more likely that he was simply calling for the removal of the President, or simply dissing him rather then asking someone to assassinate him. (Some people think Comey was threatening to kill Trump by himself.) And to make a federal court case out of all this. . well, it’s ludicrous and a waste of time and money.
The Supreme Court on Wednesday sharply restricted states from using race to draw voting districts that help minority communities elect their preferred candidates.
The 6-3 decision, which divided the court along ideological lines, further weakens the Voting Rights Act and could prompt some states to attempt to quickly redraw their congressional maps before this year’s midterm elections, potentially eliminating safe Democratic congressional seats and converting them into districts that lean Republican.
“Allowing race to play any part in government decisionmaking represents a departure from the constitutional rule that applies in almost every other context,” Justice Samuel Alito wrote in the majority opinion.
The case involved the congressional map in Louisiana, which has six seats in the U.S. House of Representatives. The state, prodded by rulings from federal courts, drew two of those six districts to have a majority of Black voters. Voting-rights activists said the majority-Black districts were necessary for the state to comply with the Voting Rights Act, the landmark 1965 law that prohibits racially discriminatory election rules.
But a group of self-described “non-African American” voters sued to challenge the state’s map as an unconstitutional racial gerrymander. They argued that considering race in drawing district lines—even if only to comply with the traditional understanding of the Voting Rights Act—violated the 14th Amendment’s prohibition on race-based discrimination.
Alito and the other conservative justices agreed. In doing so, they adopted a narrow interpretation of the central provision of the Voting Rights Act, known as Section 2.
Section 2, Alito wrote, applies only to state redistricting practices that “intentionally” discriminate against voters on the basis of race. It doesn’t prevent states from pursuing a “partisan advantage” in ways that may also reduce the voting power of large and geographically compact minority communities, he wrote.
What the disadvantage to blacks seems to be is that, by lumping them together with whites, it reduces their power as a group to vote for candidates more suitable to their ethnicity (this would be Representatives, of course, since we’re talking about federal law here). Apparently it’s okay to draw lines that favor parties, but not races. Since the two are somewhat correlated, the Court is drawing a fine line here, and I’m not quite sure why one is okay and the other not. Lines should, in my view, be drawn just to contain equal numbers of people in each district, and that has been shown to be possible without gerrymandering.
President Trump’s signature is set to be added to U.S. dollars. His name has been affixed to the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts. A plan to mint a 24-karat gold coin with his image is moving forward.
Now there are plans to release a limited-edition U.S. passport bearing the president’s likeness.
The State Department revealed the plans on Tuesday, saying that the new passports would be made available in commemoration of the country’s 250th anniversary this summer. A “limited number of specially designed” passports will be released, according to Tommy Piggott, a spokesman for the State Department. They will be available for any American citizen who applies for one at the Washington Passport Agency when the rollout happens and will continue for as long as inventory lasts, the department said.
Pictures of the proposed design, which Mr. Piggott said will feature “customized artwork and enhanced imagery,” show a serious-looking Mr. Trump above his signature in gold ink.
There will be no additional cost for the Trump-themed passports, the State Department said. It is unclear how many will be produced.
The passport redesign is the latest example of the president or his allies pushing to put his name, image or signature on institutions in Washington and across the country. This year’s National Parks passes display his face alongside George Washington’s, and some of his administration’s initiatives, such as Trump savings accounts for children and TrumpRx, where Americans can buy prescription drugs directly, are named after him.
Here’s the new passport. It seems that Trump actually likes pictures of himsef scowling; perhaps it projects an image of determination and authority. All I know is that I’m glad my passport doesn’t expire until 2034.
From U.S. State Department
Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Andrzej and Hili commiserate again:
Hili: Sometimes I have doubts.
Andrzej: It happens to me too.
In Polish:
Hili: Czasem mam wątpliwości.
Ja: Mnie się też to zdarza.
*******************
From Stacy; now why would anyone want to setal that sign? (I know, so you needn’t answer.)
From Masih; another peaceful Iranian protestor sentenced to death. Somehow Trump has managed to leave such people out of his rationale for war, though he mentioned them in his initial announcement:
Iran’s Regime Sentences 21-Year-Old Karate Champion to Death for Protesting، Execution Imminent!
So let me get this straight;
Sasan Azadvar goes to a protest… and the regime’s response is not a debate, not reform, but a rope?
Attacks on Jewish people on the streets of Britain are attacks on us all. I am so incredibly sorry that these disgusting and horrifying things are happening. https://t.co/b2PJkQtXRN
One I reposted from The Auschwitz Memorial: I didn’t know they had a free monthly online magazine, but it looks, well, very instructional. I read “Children of Block 10” in the issue highlighted below:=
A new edition of “Memoria” – the online monthly magazine of the Auschwitz Memorial.
