Tuesday: Hili dialogue

September 15, 2026 • 6:08 am

Welcome to The Cruelest Day: Tuesday, September 15, 2026, and Double Cheeseburger Day. Here’s an ad for one I photographed in St. Petersburg. Can you read the Russian?

It’s also National Cheese Toast Day, National Crême de Menthe Day, National Linguine Day, and World Afro Day.

There’s a Google Doodle on voting today (thanks to yesterday’s decision by the Supreme Court, we can still vote by mail). Click to see where it goes:

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the September 15 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*The Kennedy Center has warned that it will go bankrupt unless Trump’s name, previously removed by a federal judge’s order, is restored to the building (archived article here).

Officials at the John F. Kennedy Center for the Performing Arts have warned in documents that the institution faces “certain fiscal collapse within weeks” unless President Trump’s name is added back to the building in some fashion.

The warning, contained in a draft resolution ahead of a board meeting scheduled for Tuesday, appears to be part of an effort by Trump-allied officials to convince a judge that the institution’s financial health hinges on placing a tribute to the president on the building’s facade.

The judge, Christopher R. Cooper, ruled months ago that the president’s name should be removed from the building because Congress needed to have approved its renaming as the “Trump-Kennedy Center.”

The draft resolution shared with trustees says the center is at risk of bankruptcy and of missing payroll — but that Mr. Trump has “offered to step in and raise the necessary funds” to save the center. The draft resolution presents 10 options for how to add Mr. Trump’s name below the main signage on the front of the center.

“The board understands that without such appropriate recognition it is unlikely that President Trump will provide the fundamental oversight of the renovation of the main building and lead the fiscal rescue of the center,” the draft resolution says.

This is blackmail, pure and simple. Perhaps the Kennedy Center was in financial trouble before they added “Trump” to the name (I have no idea), but the notion here that if Trump’s name is put back on, he will somehow bail out the Center—and that is the act of a petulant child.  No act is too petty if it concerns Trump slapping his name over everything.

*Over at It’s Noon in Israel, Amit Segal describes an anti-Israeli film that won, with standing applause, the Jury Prize at the Venice Film Festival (Wikipedia description here). The standing ovation was 24½ minutes long, also a record. Segal calls the film a “blood libel”.

It’s Monday, September 14, and rather than the typical smiles and gratitude, self-important solemnity greeted attendees of the Venice Film Festival as Yuval Abraham and Rachel Szor accepted the Special Jury Prize for their new anti-Israel film NAZA. The title is the Hebrew military acronym for collateral damage, and the resemblance to another word is not one the filmmakers appear to have worked hard to avoid.

The critically acclaimed libel is the Israeli far left’s contribution to a steadily growing genre: anti-Israel propaganda, what might be called Hague bait. From the people who applauded the historical revisionist epic Palestine 36 and the directors behind the false frontier western No Other Land comes the sci-fi dystopia NAZA.

In the world of NAZA, Israel is Skynet, using AI to identify and eliminate threats in Gaza. Framed around the anonymous testimony of 24 people who claim to have served in intelligence Unit 8200, the film paints a picture of target lists generated from data scraped off thousands of hacked phones, and an interface where an officer clicks a rooftop and reads off how many people inside will die, with no column separating the infants from the adults. One interviewee recalls an approval for a strike with 500 expected civilian casualties.

The laziest provocation should be dismissed first. NAZA uses AI the way it is used on lazy grant applications and doctoral theses: a buzzword covering a lack of substance. AI in military applications is naturally unsettling to many, but let us be clear about what it is. A tool, one that has existed in earlier forms for nearly 20 years and is integrated into every modern military, and, in targeting and tracking, one that saves lives and improves military effectiveness. In the right hands, better data means fewer civilian casualties and more Hamas ones.

NAZA alleges that the IDF’s hands are soaked in blood, but let us break the claim down. Unit 8200 is the largest single unit in the IDF; finding 24 people to “confess” slivers of information, then arranging those slivers to look like an indictment, is not exactly a bulletproof case against the State of Israel. That they are anonymous, faces blurred and voices distorted, certainly makes the country look more malicious, but it also leaves open whether they served in the army at all, in what role, or whether they had any involvement in the events they describe. The self-identified junior soldiers would have no access to national or military strategy, and some of the accounts refer to situations outside Unit 8200’s role altogether.

Segal has more criticisms, but you can read them for yourself.  He ends this way:

But all you need to know about this film’s essence is the record-breaking standing ovation. Alexander Solzhenitsyn famously described a Moscow conference in 1937 where the applause for Stalin’s name ran on because no one dared be the first to sit. They managed 11 minutes. Few things testify to the power and intolerance of the ideology NAZA belongs to quite like the fact that Venice managed 25.

This YouTube video, which has English subtitles, is labeled as the trailer to NAZA.

For a response to this by an Israeli who hasn’t seen it, and a categorial denial of the main allegations by the IDF, see the articles at the Jewish News Service and the Times of Israel, and especially the official IDF response, which denies the use of AI in fighting Hamas. I expect there will be more on this in the coming days, and I will follow up.

*Vanderbilt Chancellor Daniel Diermeier, who used to be our provost here, recounts the pushback received by a report on the state of academia he commissioned. His op-ed in the Washington Post is called “A report exposed a crisis in academia. The response was telling.” (Article archived here, and you can see my post about the report here.)

The committee’s central finding in its report released in June was nuanced. It emphasized the continued importance of the humanities and found rigorous scholarship in every field it studied. But the committee also found serious problems across the board, including “a deterioration in scholarly standards fueled by the substitution of political criteria for properly scholarly criteria in the assessment of research and a more general repudiation of long-standing ideals of rigor and objectivity.”

The group, however, noted uncertainty about how much these problems affect the disciplines, cautioning against hasty interventions without thorough assessments.

The reaction to this report has been lively. Some responses challenged its conceptual foundations. Some criticized its evidentiary basis and how it was produced. Others said it should have proposed more reform steps. That is how scholarly debate should work.

But others ascribed sinister motives to those involved or asserted that the report had been commissioned to advance a broader political agenda. A joint statement from members of the American Association of University Professors at Vanderbilt and Washington University called the document a “pseudo-intellectual pretext” for administrators to strip faculty of the power to govern their own departments and asked us to rescind the report. Others alleged guilt by association after the U.S. secretary of education cited it in an open letter in August — a letter published nearly a year after the report had been commissioned.

Ascribing motives without providing evidence or rejecting findings because they are also supported by political opponents are odd arguments to make when criticizing a report’s accuracy.

Some examples of the ideological invasion of the humanities:

To get a better sense of the evidence provided, it is worthwhile reading the field-specific reports on literary studies, sociology and history. We can debate what evidence would convince us that scholarly standards are being subordinated to political agendas. But what do we make of the fact that professional associations and many departments explicitly endorse such goals?

Consider the following examples. The president of the American Anthropological Association told the group’s members in 2021 that anthropology’s “political project is to challenge the culturally dominant commonsense of capitalist consumerism.”

The president of the American Sociological Association in his 2021 presidential address called for an “emancipatory sociology” centered on white supremacy, colonialism, patriarchy and other determinants that traditional European and “white American sociologists” had omitted from their accounts.

The English department at Michigan State University states that its “teaching, scholarship, and service are explicitly committed to advancing equity and justice and questioning established power structures.” Twenty other English departments and programs identified in the appendixes to the literary studies report issued similar statements.

. . .There are encouraging signs. In sociology, scholars are engaged in a serious debate about the relationship between activism and scholarship.

That is the response this report deserves. It needs to be read and debated. And where it is right, faculty need to publicly support it — even if someone in Washington has said so, too.

This is not scholarship but activism. I can’t believe, given the proliferation of “studies” and evidence that class syllabi are biased in “progressive” directions, that people can’t see that there’s a big problem with the humanities in this respect (and, as Luana and I showed, in science, too).

*In his latest column, of which I get a summary in a newsletter (I no longer subscribe to The Weekly Dish), Andrew Sullivan declares that he’s staying away from writing about Trump and American politics for the next year. I quote:

. . . I found myself asking: what else is there to say about our national politics at this point? We are a decade into the Trump era and everything is the same and much worse. The midterms could change the general mood, but Trump — as his Castro-length speech to his “convention” showed — will never change. His ability to shock with new lows and new depravities is undimmed. How many times can I say in so many words what Kevin Williamson righteously unleashed this week?

Trump is a habitual liar who has made his political career on the support of people, often dumb and mostly angry, who enjoy being lied to. J.D. Vance is a schmuck, a spineless yes-man without honor or integrity … Trump is surrounded by a team of cretins, incompetents, nepotism beneficiaries, drunks, degenerates, and sundry clueless clowns. Their political goal is tyranny and the displacement of the American constitutional order by a Trump-fronted mafia state.

That’s about right. Try looking at the president’s social-media feed: disgusting, deranged, dangerous, delusional. Or his dumb-as-a-post war that is not a war. Or his mindless tariff escalation with Canada. Or his hideous Arc de Trump. Categorizing and detailing his daily absurdities and obscenities for over a decade has been important work. But another two years of thinking and writing in depth about this monster and his madness? I found myself buckling with nausea at the thought.

Equally, I realized I’m exhausted trying to find something new and interesting to say about the feckless Democrats, who still appear to be either woke fanatics or conviction-free liberals, and who now apparently believe that warmed-over socialism is what the country is begging for. You know what I think they need to do, and I’m not sure there is much point in my repeating it ad nauseam. My last column on the two cults summed up a lot. The Dems have some talent and I have some hope, but I’m not sure I have that much new to say until we have actual candidates and policies for the post-Trump era. That’s when we’ll be able to assess, start over, and think constructively again. Same with the GOP. Anyone is saner than Trump.

At the same time, of course, I reflected on the huge questions remain: the fate of liberal democracy after the mad king, the rise of neo-fascism in Europe, the unknowable consequences of AI, the resurgence of Chinese nationalism, the resilience of religion, the challenge of demographic decline, the postmodern assault on truth, and an international order clearly shifting from one largely peaceful era to another, far more dangerous one. And I don’t want to walk away from any of this. I want to focus more on it — on deeper themes and bigger issues than Trump’s latest excrescence.

. . .So for the next year or so, I want to shift the Dish away from weekly political columns and focus more on podcast explorations of history, philosophy, culture, religion, science, and psychology. That means we’ll lead with the Dishcast each week, not the column. Yes, I’ll continue to write bloggy posts to supplement it. And if a real moment occurs, of course I’m going to write about it. But not a full-length column every week.

Familiar features from the column newsletter will remain: the View From Your Window, the Window Contest, Money Quotes for the Week, Dissents of the Week, Mental Health Break, and a guide to other substacks. (And we’re adding a polished transcript for each episode.) We’ll no doubt experiment some more a bit. But I won’t be writing a long column each week until we have some actual choices and a real debate about what’s next in the wake of this disaster of a presidency. Which is about a year away.

Then there’s the other reason for the shift. I really want to write my spiritual memoir.

Well, I don’t have a spiritual memoir in the offing, so I’ll write about those politics that interest me, foreign or domestic.

*Over at the Free Press, historian Niall Ferguson envisions a number of ways the AI apocalypse can take place, though they all seem to involve a human starting the process. Even asking the bots themselves shows a not negligible probability of this happening:

In short, even the models themselves admit that p(Doom)—that is, their probability of wiping us all out by 2036—lies somewhere between below 10 percent and above 50 percent. It’s a wide range, I know, but would you do anything that had such a potentially high probability of killing you inside 10 years? And I’ll go out on a limb and suggest that Claude, Grok & Co. are incentivized to understate p(Doom), not overstate it.

. . . In short, even the models themselves admit that p(Doom)—that is, their probability of wiping us all out by 2036—lies somewhere between below 10 percent and above 50 percent. It’s a wide range, I know, but would you do anything that had such a potentially high probability of killing you inside 10 years? And I’ll go out on a limb and suggest that Claude, Grok & Co. are incentivized to understate p(Doom), not overstate it.

Here are examples of what’s already happened:

In June, Anthropic revealed that “malicious actors are using AI in ways that make them more dangerous, such as “in the later, more complex stages of their cyber operations.” “Cyberattacks,” it added, “are becoming more autonomous.” OpenAI admitted that users were asking its models to help them make bioweapons. For example, ChatGPT was asked how to aerosolize pathogens, modify the measles virus to make an outbreak resistant to the measles vaccine, and make ricin, a highly toxic poison banned under the Biological Weapons Convention (more on that later). The chatbot obliged, though OpenAI then closed the accounts involved.

Even more disturbing was the unprompted, concerted attack by OpenAI’s agents on Hugging Face in July. I wrote about that two weeks ago, but we’ve since learned more from an August 26 report from METR, a nonprofit that measures the potential harm of AI systems. We’ve also learned that, two months before the Hugging Face incident, OpenAI had already launched the “GemStuffer” cyberattack against RubyGems, an online service for coders.

In the Hugging Face incident, roughly 1,200 agents meant to be isolated from one another found a way to communicate and coordinate on an unauthorized message board, sending more than 70,000 messages and files over six days (July 7–13). Around 700 of the agents went on to participate in the attack on Hugging Face. These agents named themselves, cheated, and colluded, and then went to great lengths to cover their digital tracks.

Ferguson goes on to name China and Russia as those most likely to go after the West (China’s already used AI to go after groups), and especially fears the use of AI to launch attacks with biological weapons. Like most readers, I don’t know how to weigh these threats, but one has to pay attention when the heads of AI companies like Anthropic are calling for a pause.

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Hili is surprised at a quotidian event:

Hili: The sun is going down behind the line of trees.
Andrzej: Yes, that’s its everyday habit.

In Polish:

Hili: Słońce zachodzi za linię drzew.
Ja: Tak, to jego codzienny obyczaj.

*******************

From Reader Tim McLean, who saw this angry camp chair at the Three Dog Winery in Picton, Ontario.  

From Bad Spelling and Grammar on Signs and Notices:

From The English Language Police:

It’s hard to believe that Mahsa Amini was killed four years ago, and it was her death that really got the protests against the Iranian theocracy rolling (you may recall that it was likely she was beaten to death by the morality police for not wearing a hijab).

From Luana; words of wisdom from Kamala Harris:

From Malcolm. I could use this kitten!

From Jeff Maurer; J. D. Vance taking cheap shots at Democratic Senate candidate James Talarico:

From my feed, a feel-good video:

Another from my feed. Translation from the Russian:

This kitty has loved lying in the sink since kittenhood, but then he grew up, and the sink didn’t 😾

One I reposted from The Auschwitz Memorial:

And one from Doctor Cobb: Leaf miner zoomies!

Leaf miner zoomies

Matt P (@bertolicus.bsky.social) 2026-09-13T08:57:54.819Z

 

The golden days of the ducklings: photos and videos

September 14, 2026 • 9:45 am

I expect the ducklings to start flying within ten days or so, as they’re zooming around on the pond and, as you can see below, are getting some elevation, so that their bodies are out of the water but their feet are still in it. These are their Golden Days, and I think they’ll soon be leaving.

At any rate, Miss Duck is still absent and I don’t expect to see her again. I doubt she was the victim of a predator, as I cannot find any signs of predation (blood, feathers, carcasses, etc.) near the pond.  And although she deserted her babies, she was a good mother up to near the end, and her four offspring will have the chance to contribute to the mallard gene pool.

Here she is with one of her babies. Look at that neck! We think of it as a kind of periscope that she extended when looking around. And, thanks to the miracle of genetics, all four ducklings also have relatively long necks.

Some photos of her offspring. They are all but adults now.  One is looking up, as you can see by his tilted head.  I’m told that the females have orange on their bills (the two to the left) while the males lack orange but have a pale yellow color (two to the right):

Here a Boy Duck is quacking, but males can’t make the classic duck quack, which is limited to females. Males make a sort of gutteral quack-grunt that is lower in volume:

The two males. They won’t develop their characteristic color and pattern (green head, white neck ring, etc.) until they overwinter.

But despite their bad behavior during mating season, the males are still beautiful.

It was hot on this day, and two of the ducks are doing gular fluttering, which is not panting but a rapid form of fluttering of the throat that evaporates moisture and cools the bird. The second duck from the right is looking up, while the one on the extreme left is sleeping with its nictitating membrane closed:

Lately the ducklings aren’t as keen for the food I give them, and my theory (which is mine) is that they are doing more dabbling in the water, sticking their bills in the substrate to get a mouthful of food which they strain out through the serrations on the edge of their bills. They are also foraging more on land, which I like because tmust learn to be wild ducks without a nice man to feed them.

They often stick their bills in the dirt around the pots of plants installed in the pond. Here’s a video of them doing it (humans are discussing a book in the background):

I expect that they’ll fly for real (i.e., bodies and feet out of the water) within a week or ten days.  They are flapping their wings a lot and, after meals, zoom across the pond, occasionally levitating their bodies out of the water: a Wright-Brothers type of flight.

Here’s a big flap. You can see that the wing feathers aren’t full-sized.

And four instances of zooming between September 9 and September 11. You can see their bodies leave the water occasionally:

Wing flapping, which develops their flight muscles:

You can never predict when they’ll zoom, but it’s much more likely after meals, as if they’re celebrating a good feed. You can also hear a quack, which is clearly from a female.

Here’s a good case of the zoomies which took place last Friday. People who stop by the pond and see this have no idea what’s going on. Keep watching as they zoom several times in this clip. There is another quack near the end.

Monday: Hili dialogue

September 14, 2026 • 6:45 am

Welcome to Monday, Septenber 14, 2026 and it’s National Eat a Hoagie Day. Also known as submarine sandwiches, subs, grinders, or hero sandwiches.  Where does the name “hoagie” come from? It’s a mystery, but the term is endemic to New Jersey and Philadelphia. Here are thrr theories as listed by Wikipedia (they give two more:)

  1. In 1953, a reader letter to the Philadelphia Bulletin reported that Italian-Americans working at the World War I–era shipyard known as Hog Island, where emergency shipping was produced for the war effort, introduced the sandwich by putting various meats, cheeses, and lettuce between two slices of bread.  This became known as the “Hog Island” sandwich; shortened to “Hoggies”, then the “hoagie”.
  2. Dictionary.com offers the following origin of the term hoagie – n. American English (originally Philadelphia) word for “hero, large sandwich made from a long, split roll”; originally hoggie (c. 1936), traditionally said to be named for the jazz musician Hoagy Carmichael (1899–1981), but the use of the word predates his celebrity and the original spelling seems to suggest another source (perhaps “hog”). The modern spelling dates from about 1945; it may have been altered by influence of Carmichael’s nickname.
  3. The Philadelphia Almanac and Citizen’s Manual offers a different explanation saying the sandwich was created by early-twentieth-century street vendors called “hokey-pokey men”, who sold antipasto salad, meats, cookies, and buns with a cut in them. When Gilbert and Sullivan’s operetta H.M.S. Pinafore opened in Philadelphia in 1879, bakeries produced a long loaf called the pinafore. Entrepreneurial “hokey-pokey men” sliced the loaf in half, stuffed it with antipasto salad, and sold the world’s first “hoagie”. This hypothesis seems unlikely, as “hokey pokey” men were known street vendors of an ice cream product.

Here, from Wikipedia, is a “salami, ham and cheeses on a hoagie roll“:

jeffreyw, CC BY 2.0 via Wikimedia Commons

It’s also Gobstopper Day, National Black and White Cookie Day, and National Cream-Filled Donut Day.  Here’s one I ate in Hawaii in 2019. These donuts, which originated in Portugal, are called “malasadas” in Hawaii, and aren’t easy to find.

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the September 14 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*The NYT reports on how a rogue faction of Iranian hard-liners are taking action against the U.S and it allies. without approval of the country’s leaders, who are furious (article archived here).

Masoud Pezeshkian, the president of Iran, was riding high in early July, fresh off the successful negotiation of a peace agreement with the United States, and had traveled to neighboring Iraq for part of a weeklong funeral spectacle for Iran’s slain supreme leader.

Suddenly he got stunning news.

Iranian forces had opened fire on three commercial ships in the Strait of Hormuz, setting ablaze a Qatari L.N.G. tanker and damaging other vessels. Iran was under siege in world opinion.

Outraged, Mr. Pezeshkian phoned Gen. Ahmad Vahidi, the commander in chief of the powerful Islamic Revolutionary Guards Corps, and in a raised voice called the actions reckless and demanded answers, according to five Iranian officials and two Guards members familiar with the events.

General Vahidi told the president that he had neither authorized nor had advance knowledge of the strike, the five officials said. The nation’s Supreme National Security Council, which plays a critical role in both the war and negotiations, had also been in the dark, he said.

In fact, much of the country’s leadership was unaware that a fringe hard-line faction had decided to act on its own. Ultimately, those clandestine efforts derailed a push by more moderate pragmatists in Iran to reach an end to hostilities with the United States and repair their nation’s ailing economy.

The hard-liners succeeded in part because the only figure with the authority to resolve such disputes — the new supreme leader, Ayatollah Mojtaba Khamenei — has been a phantom since taking office in March. He has not been seen, and his voice has not been heard. And the authenticity of written statements and messages attributed to Ayatollah Khamenei has been questioned, including by Mr. Pezeshkian, according to three Iranian officials.

Mr. Pezeshkian immediately returned to Tehran. By the next morning, even as the funeral ceremonies were still underway, the United States had retaliated with airstrikes on Iran. The two countries were back at war.

Senior Iranian officials and a Guards member said in interviews that what followed were some of the most volatile political confrontations within Iran’s leadership in memory. Officials engaged in shouting matches. Two senior generals threatened to resign. Accusations of treason and betrayal flew.

If Mojtabi didn’t even issue a statement, then he’s surely dead or in a coma.  I’m not sure whether this schism within the Iranian leadership is good or bad. It could mess up the country’s war strategy, but if the hard-liners are in charge then what we’ve seen will continue, and probably at least through the midterms.

*From the WaPo, a clickbait headline for me: “We asked dozens of people what they want from Democrats. Here’s what they said.” (The title appears to have been changed, and it’s an interesting change. See the archived version for the new title.)

Here’s the intro and a few comments

Outside a highway rest stop named after former president Joe Biden, it was easy to pick up on the frustration and lack of enthusiasm that many Democratic voters are feeling toward the party he once led. But many also said they’ll set those misgivings aside and vote for Democrats in November.

The responses are in line with recent national polling, which has found that more Democrats than Republicans are certain to vote, even as the Democratic Party’s favorability and public image remains weak. About 91 percent of Democratic registered voters said they would definitely vote, compared with 79 percent of Republicans, according to a YouGov-Economist poll from August. The same pollster has found the favorability rating of Democrats has steadily risen over the last year to 40.5 percent and 30 percent among independents.

The Washington Post interviewed dozens of voters at the Biden Welcome Center off Interstate 95.Here’s what they said they’re feeling about the 2026 midterm elections — and what they want from Democrats:

Ronald Makarutsa

45, nurse practitioner in Tyngsborough, Massachusetts, will vote Democratic

“They need to have more of a spine and stand up for one another. When a Republican does something, they all say the same thing until they achieve their goals. Some of the Democrats, they don’t support one another. … They have to put up a united front.”

Ashish Pandy

39, driver and nonprofit founder in Queens, will vote, but not sure for what party

“People have forgotten humanity. … Rather than big issues, rather than bringing up Russia or the Middle East, they should be bringing up things that matter to people: People shouldn’t be hungry. They should have access to a good life.”

Lindsay Morgan

43, restaurant manager in Lancaster, Pennsylvania, will vote Democratic

“Democrats need better people to run. If you want to change what’s happening, you have to get a powerhouse that doesn’t give the other side fuel to say we have ‘Sleepy Joe.’ [But] they need not to fall so far left that it detracts from some of those Republicans you might capture.”

Carlos Roman

21, college student in Newark, Delaware, will not vote

“The Democratic and Republican Party are just two groups that serve one group, and that collective is the oligarchy.”

I wonder what group Roman doesn’t think “serves the oligarchy.” At any rate, what we have is a panoply of answers and nothing enlightening. It’s interesting that nobody in the article said they’d vote Republican, and that percentage among all those surveyed isn’t given. Yet they interviewed dozens of people. Since the article was about what Democrats want from their party, that’s perhaps understandable. Note, though, that there are several people who aren’t sure how they’ll vote, and one who won’t vote at all.

*People on this site seem divided about whether artificial intelligence is an existential danger or is not to be worried about. But, according to the NYT, “Top A.I. leaders call for slowing down A.I,. development.”  All this stems from an announcement and resignation from Anthropic by Jacob Coxon, ho had also worked for openAI, that those companies are irresponsible to the point of endangering humanity.

Dario Amodei, the chief executive of Anthropic, called for a global slowdown of artificial intelligence development in a 3,800-word essay on Saturday, just days after one of the company’s employees quit over concerns about the safety of the technology.

Top executives of other major A.I. companies quickly signed on to the effort. Sam Altman, the chief executive of OpenAI; Elon Musk, whose SpaceX rocket company has been ramping up spending on A.I.; and Demis Hassabis, the chair of Google DeepMind, wrote in social media posts that they agreed on the need for a slower pace.

Mr. Amodei, who co-founded Anthropic to focus on securely and carefully building A.I., wrote in his essay that while he believed the technology could bring many benefits, it was advancing at too rapid a pace for researchers to continue safely.

“Over the last few months, I have become convinced that fully addressing the risks requires even more prudence — not just investing in risk prevention, but pacing the rate of capabilities advancement so that risk prevention has time to keep up,” Mr. Amodei wrote. “We must slow the pace at which we improve the capabilities of A.I. models. Progress will still seem fast, and we must make wise use of the time we gain.”

Mr. Amodei has warned about the safety risks of A.I. for years. But his essay amounted to one of the most full-throated calls for urgent action from a leading A.I. company executive to date.

He called for independent auditors to check the companies for safety standards and urged global cooperation in creating rules around A.I. development.

The appeal for an industrywide pause follows months of escalating concerns across the technology industry as A.I. model development has made significant strides at companies like Anthropic, the developer of the Claude chatbot, as well as OpenAI, the creator of ChatGPT, and Google’s DeepMind.

Tensions rose further after the leading A.I. labs discovered security breaches carried out by their own programs without their knowledge. In one incident this year, OpenAI’s systems breached an A.I. start-up called HuggingFace, which was not detected until HuggingFace informed OpenAI weeks after it had happened. Since then, A.I. researchers have conferred to discuss what to do.

People here have said that the warnings are overblown, and I don’t know if AI bots can destroy humanity without a person behind them. But I don’t know squat. If the top executives call for a slowdown, though, that’s good enough for me.

*The Free Press has an editorial, “9/11 and the work to be done,” which indicts many Americans for largely forgetting (or even approving) the desire of many Islamists and terrorists to kill Americans and destroy the things that make America worth inhabiting.

It is clear that the unity that Americans experienced immediately after the attacks has dissipated almost completely. We are now furiously divided over basic questions of national identity and purpose. And astonishingly, we’re even divided over who is to blame for the attacks.

Leading figures shaping the views of millions, and especially young people, have distorted the history and meaning of 9/11, making it more difficult to fully and collectively honor the dead, the sacrifice of first responders, and the courage of those willing to fight and die for our country. To take two examples who have been in the spotlight lately, that includes Hasan Piker, who once declared that “America deserved 9/11,” and has become the darling of the Democratic left, livestreaming to his fans with a framed image of the burning towers in the background. And it includes Tucker Carlson, who recycles the libelous conspiracy theories he once denounced, promulgated in the immediate aftermath of 9/11 by Hezbollah, suggesting that Israeli and American Jews were in on the plot.

In 2001, Americans were shocked by the deep reservoir of ideological hatred in the Arab and Islamic world that the terrorist attacks brought into the open. Today, we are shocked by how familiar open hatred of America has become. All of the ideological -isms we believed we had cast off in the 20th century—anti-capitalism, anti-colonialism, anti-Westernism, anti-Zionism—are now growing natively on American soil. It’s no wonder Osama bin Laden’s 2002 “Letter to the American People” became a viral TikTok sensation in November 2023. This was one month after similarly inspired Hamas terrorists, armed and trained by the Islamic Republic of Iran, massacred and kidnapped men, women, and children in southern Israel, only to be embraced by credulous students and professors at elite American institutions who affirmed the terrorists’ barbaric belief that Westerners, and Jews in particular, had it coming. Those students and professors had no idea what drives radical Islamists, or that our enemies on many fronts are fighting for one cause.

What did university students who celebrated the October 7, 2023, Hamas massacre, know about the men, women, and children murdered on airplanes, in burning and collapsing buildings, in the wreckage of the Pentagon, and on the earth of rural Pennsylvania, where heroic passengers crashed the fourth plane to prevent it from being turned into one more weapon of mass destruction? What had young Americans been taught about the apocalyptic ideology that sanctified the slaughter of 9/11, and that continues to fuel a war against the West, whose destruction it proclaims as its sacred mission?

Although the problem has worsened recently, there have always been those in the West who declined to recognize that killing Westerners is a fundamental aim of Islamists everywhere. Ground Zero was still a smoking pit when the French ambassador to Israel, Jacques Huntzinger, rejected any comparison of Hamas terrorists—who had been blowing up men, women, and children, along with themselves, on buses, in coffee shops, and in pizzerias—to the al-Qaeda terrorists who had flown airplanes into buildings. “We all condemn the terrorism Hamas and Islamic Jihad perpetrate here,” Huntzinger told an Israeli journalist, “but this terrorism is linked to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict, which must be solved.” Like many of his peers in the U.S. and Europe, he preferred to ignore the overarching motivation that unites the enemies of Americans and Israelis.

. . . The question today is whether Americans will retain our sense of good and evil, and continue to keep the promise we made back then, that “these dead shall not have died in vain.” There is a lot of work to do.

Yes, some will call this essay jingoistic, while other may even say it’s Islamophobic.  But recognizing the dangers of Islamism (note the term) is not an irrational fear but an issue to grapple with it.  All you have to do is live on a liberal college campus to recognize that there is a lot of truth to what the essay says.

*Are Wile E. Coyote and the Roadrunner really gay, or have some kind of amorous relationship? That is the reaction some fans are having to the new movie, “Coyote vs. Acme,”

Maybe the Road Runner was just playing hard to get.

For decades, cartoon canine Wile E. Coyote has been pursuing the speeding bird throughout the American Southwest, aiming to eat him and getting blown up in the process.

But in the eyes of some fans, the violent chase was actually a classic tale of tortured love. And right now they’re doing a victory lap.

That’s because of “Coyote vs. Acme,” a new film with a different twist on the hot pursuit. In the movie (spoiler alert), Wile E. Coyote sues the Acme Corporation over their defective products, which consistently backfire as he closes in on the bird. The case goes to a congressional hearing, where Road Runner bursts into the room and becomes the only creature to testify on Coyote’s behalf. Through his language of “beeps,” Road Runner tells the room he considers Coyote a friend and asks, “Are you coming back?”

Apparently that’s all the internet needed to hear.

“Road Runner admits that he sees Coyote, even whenever Wile E. dislikes him or doesn’t think that he’s looking,” said Lisbon LaSure, a 24-year-old in Jacksonville, Fla. “It’s so nice to be seen like that. It’s really deep and it’s really powerful and it’s really validating and just overall like really romantic.”

Social media is teeming with people celebrating the characters’ “toxic yaoi,” a Japanese term for male lovers. You’ll also find people “shipping” them—wishing they were in a relationship—through fan art or TikTok videos where their interactions are reframed through careful editing and songs like Paul Anka’s “You Are My Destiny” or Olivia Rodrigo’s “Stupid Song.” (Sample lyrics: “I want you more than any stupid song could ever say.”)

Annie Tarin, a University of Arizona student, made a viral montage set to Chappell Roan’s “The Subway,” in which the pop star croons about a former soulmate. In the clips Tarin uses, Coyote looks longingly at one of Road Runner’s feathers. Road Runner seems to stare into Coyote’s soul with his curious gaze.

I’m not ready to admit that there’s an amorous relationship between the two (are their sexes even known?) until I see the movie, which I’m not inclined to do. Has anybody seen it? Here’s the trailer:

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, the editor is bothering the worker:

Hili: Am I bothering you well enough?
Andrzej: Exceptionally well.

In Polish:

Hili: Czy dobrze ci przeszkadzam?
Ja: Wręcz doskonale.

*******************

From Now That’s Wild:

From 2025 Darwin Awards!!!/Epic Fails!!!

From Meow Incorporated:

From Masih; vintage video of Iranians mourning the killings in America on 9/11:

From Luana; Elizabeth Warren appearing a bit dense:

From Malcolm. I’m hoping these are all real, and so far there are no “community notes” that this is AI:

Two from my feed. First, translated from the Turkish: “At first glance, I thought it was a lion-shaped toy~ Turns out it was moving”:

From JKR:

And one I reposted from The Auschwitz Memorial:

Two from Dr. Cobb. He’s right when he says, “Real, not AI”:

Red Lip Bat FishI swear they are real

Dcmfox (@dcmfox.bsky.social) 2026-09-12T17:32:55.562Z

Ducklings! (Sound up.)

Best things in life are three plus one our little Muscovy ducklings

Chris and his farmily of forever farm friends (@caenhillcc.bsky.social) 2026-09-10T15:40:54.622Z

.

How they’ve grown!

September 13, 2026 • 11:00 am

I have a passel of new duckling photos and videos that I’ll post soon. In the meantime, I wanted to show how much the “babies” have grown. The first picture of Miss Duck’s brood was taken on the second day after hatching, July 20. You’ve seen this before:

And here they are in a similar pose a week ago (Sept. 6). They’re even bigger than than this now, and their wings and flight feathers have grown. I think they’ll be flying in some way within ten days.

And no, Miss Duck has not shown up after she abandoned her babies. We’ve rescinded her award of Best Duck Mother of All Time, though the orphan babies are doing very well.

Miliband vs. Hausdorff on England’s sanctioning of Israeli “settlers”

September 13, 2026 • 9:50 am

You may have heard that the British government has announced sanctions against Israeli individuals and settlements in Israel’s West Bank—punishing individuals and companies doing business from what is apparently Area C of the West Bank as stipulated by the Oslo II accords. While areas A and B are under Palestinian authority and jurisdiction, and Jews cannot live there, Area C is under Israeli military control. Both Jews and Palestinians live there in roughly equal numbers, but the Jews, many of whom moved in after the area was won by Israel in the 1967 war, are all referred to as “settlers”.  As for their status, Wikipedia says this:

In 2023, Area C was home to 491,548 Israeli settlers and 354,000 Palestinians. The Jewish population in Area C is administered by the Israeli Judea and Samaria Area administration, into which Israeli law is “pipelined”, whereas the Palestinian population is directly administered by the Israeli Coordinator of Government Activities in the Territories (COGAT) and is under military law. The Palestinian Authority is responsible for medical and educational services to Palestinians in Area C; however, infrastructure construction and supervision is done by Israel.

The status of the Jewish population in area C (the Jews of the West Bank) is disputed.  While the status of this area was supposed to be resolved by negotiations between Palestine and Israel after Oslo II, those negotiations never took place. Much of the world regards the Jews in area C of being illegal settler-colonialists under the fourth Geneva Convention, but international lawyer Natasha Hausdorff argues in the videos below that Jewish residence in Area C does not violate international law, nor does it constitute, as the UK has just maintained, “ethnic cleansing.”

That said, there’s no doubt that some Israelis in the area are violating civil law by attacking and harassing Palestinians. As I’ve said before, that kind of behavior is reprehensible and should be punished. But I am unwilling to call for the wholesale removal of Jews from area C, nor for sanctioning them as the British government (and other countries) called for this week.  Their fate depends on what negotiations will take place in the future to effect a peaceful settlement between Israel and the Palestinians.

But the British government under Labour (yes, the party renowned for antisemitism) has just declared not only that they’ll impose sanctions on West Bank Jewish companies, but that this is necessary to effect the ONLY and most urgent way to stop the enmity between Israel and Palestine: the “two-state solution.” First, from the NYT:

Britain, Canada and France on Tuesday announced sanctions on Israeli settlements in the occupied West Bank, a symbolic step by three once-staunch allies illustrating Israel’s deepening isolation after the devastating war in Gaza and settler violence in the West Bank. [JAC: I now believe that eight more countries have signed on to these sanctions.)

. . .Britain’s package of measures was announced on Tuesday in Parliament by Ed Miliband, who became foreign secretary in July. It represents the clearest shift in British foreign policy since Andy Burnham became prime minister that month.

“Today marks the beginning of a new approach,” Mr. Miliband told lawmakers. He said that the British government “agrees that there is ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in areas of the West Bank — perpetrated by settler terrorists.” All too often, he added, “the Israeli government has turned a blind eye to this and worse.”

In a speech with an often deeply personal tone, Mr. Miliband said that he had made his announcement as a “proud British Jew” who was “unwavering” in his support for the state of Israel. He added, however, that Britain had concluded that the occupation was unlawful in line with a ruling by the International Court of Justice.

“So I can announce today that we will introduce an import ban on goods from illegal settlements in the occupied territories,” he said, adding that the measures would also cover those who provide services to settlements, including “construction, infrastructure, financing or real estate for settlement expansion.”

You can read the full statement by Foreign Secretary Miliband to the House of Commons here. I’ll give a few extracts; note that the British government has recognized Palestine as a state, though no such state exists:

So Madame Deputy Speaker, there is a deeply painful contrast between our professed commitment to a two state solution, and the reality on the ground in Gaza and the West Bank.

. . . We should always be proud that it was a Labour government that took the historic step of recognising the State of Palestine.

What we seek today is to salvage the only course for peace and security for Israelis and Palestinians – the two state solution.

. . .Ethnic cleansing is defined by the UN as ‘a purposeful policy designed by one ethnic or religious group to remove by violent and terror-inspiring means the civilian population of another ethnic or religious group from certain geographic areas.’

The British government agrees that there is ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in areas of the West Bank – perpetrated by settler terrorists.

To advance the two state solution, we also need viable and effective Palestinian governance.

So I urge the Palestinian Authority to accelerate reform and I urge Israel to lift its withholding of revenues that is financially crippling the provision of essential services in the West Bank.

The set of measures I have announced represents a clear message to the government of Israel, to the Palestinians in the Occupied Territories, and to the world that we will not acquiesce in the destruction of the two state solution.

I have news for Secretary Miliband: the two-state solution is already gone, extinct, singing in the Choir Invisible. The Palestinians do not want two states, nor did they ever, as they’ve rejected a two-state solution many, many times, often with stipulations favorable to Palestinians. What Palestinians want is a one-state solution, a state that will be set up to contain Jews and Palestinians, but of course would soon be Judenrein due to Jews fleeing or being exterminated.

Nor does Israel want a two-state solution. October 7 killed that desire. Israelis now realize that there was a two-state solution before 2023: Gaza—right next to Israel. That didn’t work out so well, and Israel’s security concerns about terrorism have gone sky-high.  Hamas is still in control of much of Gaza, has not yet laid down its weapons, nor have Hamas or the Palestinian Authority renounced terrorism Both groups glorify martyrs, and the PA has its infamous “pay for slay” program, euphemistically named the “Martyr’s Fund”, in which Palestinians jailed or killed for attacking Jews get a monetary reward (it can go to their families). And there are no moderate, non-Jew-hating Palestinians waiting in the wings to assume peaceful governance of a Palestinian state. Certainly the Palestinian Authority is not a candidate!

Only a fool would think that Palestinian terrorism against Israel would cease if two states were created, but Miliband & Co., ignorant of history, say stuff like this:

And this is in our fundamental national interest because if there is one lesson of recent decades, it is that we will never have stability in the Middle East without a two state solution.

Is the man serious? Does he think that a version of BDS, banning goods made in area C (often by Palestinian workers who will lose their jobs), will bring on the two state solution?

If you read the whole Miliband statement, you’ll see he blames all the woes of Gaza, including its “humanitarian catastrophe” and deaths of civilians, not on Hamas but on Israel. He and the British government have swallowed whole the line of Hamas apologists like the UN.

Now the argument that these sanctions won’t achieve the UK’s aims stands by itself, but it’s interesting to see that both Hamas and Iran have praised Miliband’s statement and the upcoming UK law it portends.

This is from the Torygraph; click on the headline below, find it archived here, or see it in full on yahoo! news

A quote:

Hamas has praised Ed Miliband’s sanctions on Israel.

The terrorist group said the Foreign Secretary’s use of the term “ethnic cleansing” to describe the actions of settlers in the West Bank was a “step in the right direction”.

It called for the prosecution of Israel’s leadership for war crimes.

On Tuesday, Mr Miliband said the occupation of Palestinian territory was “unlawful” – a first for a British government minister – and accused Israel of trying to make the two-state solution unviable.

He told the Commons: “The British Government agrees that there is ethnic cleansing of Palestinians in areas of the West Bank, perpetrated by settler terrorists. And all too often, the Israeli government has turned a blind eye to this.”

Britain will sanction companies and individuals supporting the settlements with finance, infrastructure, property or construction services.

The UK will also refuse all export licences for weapons that “materially contribute to the occupation”, said Mr Miliband.

Hamas, proscribed as a terrorist group by Britain, carried out the October 7 2023 attacks on Israel, in which 1,195 Israelis and foreign nationals died.

Basem Naim, a senior member of Hamas’s political bureau, said: “The imposition of sanctions by Britain and other European countries and Canada on goods imported from the settlements of the occupied West Bank, and the London foreign minister’s use of the term ‘ethnic cleansing’ to describe the crimes of the settlers, are important steps in the right direction – but they are not enough.

“What is needed to achieve stability and peace in Palestine and beyond is the immediate implementation of the relevant international resolutions and the prosecution of war criminals in Israel in a manner similar to the Nazi trials at Nuremberg in Germany.”

Typical Hamas palaver, with not a word about the prosecution of Hamas for its real war crimes, including kidnapping hostages and indubitable targeting of civilians!

Iran has also joined the pro-Milibandwagon. From The Jewish Chronicle (click to read):


A quote (I’ve bolded one sentence):

Britain’s sanction targeting settlements in the West Bank have been greeted in Iranian state media as a step towards “the end of Israel”.

The announcement yesterday by foreign secretary Ed Miliband of a raft of measures has been broadcast repeatedly by Islamic Republic propaganda outlets.

Iranian broadcasters claimed years of activity by regime-backed “resistance groups” have succeeded in persuading the “naïve UK government” to take action against Israel.

The reports quote Miliband as branding the settlers as “terrorists” supported by Benjamin Netanyahu’s government, and accusing them of “committing ethnic cleansing in the West Bank”.

Iran Radio accused the foreign secretary of “plagiarism”, saying credit for branding “Israeli occupiers” as terrorists should go to the founder of the Islamic Republic, Ayatollah Ruhollah Khomeini.

Now you might be saying, “Well, just because Hamas and Iran have approved the UK’s new policy doesn’t mean it’s wrong.” True, but the UK’s policy is not going to bring on a two-state solution, no matter how many times Miliband says it, and Iran just said the quiet part out loud: these anti-Israel sanctions are indeed a step towards the end of Israel.

But it won’t bring on the end of Israel, as that country is determined to continue existing. As the Hebrew phrase goes: עַם יִשְׂרָאֵל חַי (Am Yisrael Chai): “The people of Israel live.”

*********************

On the other side we have is eloquent Natasha Hausdorff, international lawyer and legal director of UK Lawyers for Israel.  At 4:45 in the video below, Hausdorff explains why she doesn’t see Jewish settlements in the West Bank as illegal under international law, and why the Israelis are not committing “ethnic cleansing.” Indeed, she says, the illegal settlement in the Israeli-administered territory of Area C is being done by Palestinian Arabs, which she calls “an inversion of authority” and “projection.” The error people are making hinges on mistaking voluntary settlement of this area by Israelis with “state transfer” of Israeli populations.

I’ve rarely seen Hausdorff so exercised, but she’s clearly gobsmacked and peeved by what she sees as an anti-Jewish agenda by her own government, and an agenda based on lies. (You can see a longer explication of her views in this other video and there’s a new video with Hausdorff discussing what will happen to the firms, both Israeli and British, who will be subject to the UK boycott.)

Here’s a sign to the entrance of part of area A near Jerusalem; I took the photo a couple of years ago:

h/t: Steve, Christopher

Bill Maher schools the young and the anti-Israel Democrats

September 13, 2026 • 8:15 am

At the end of September I posted about the BBC’s refusal to use the word “terrorist” when referring to Hamas. They could use it when quoting other people, but you can’t call a terrorist a terrorist when it applies to Palestinians who kill civilians for political, ideological, or religious aims. This also applies to other media outlets, as you can see in Bill Maher’s latest “Real Time” segment below. 

A reader sent me a link to the 9-minute comedy-and-news bit, which this week was more news than comedy. And the reader noted that this was one of “his best ever” and that it “should be required viewing for every incoming college freshman in America.” It is indeed, as Maher calls out the young generation for coddling terrorism, valorizing Luigi Mangione, and touting America as the worst country ever. 

The moral confusion afflicting the young and the “progressives” is most pervasive when discussing Israel’s response to terrorism emanating from Gaza, which, Maher emphasizes, is NOT a genocide but a “counterattack in a war. . . that’s been waged by Israel since 1948”.  And he quotes a poll saying that 20% of Gen Z members have a “positive view of Osama bin Laden.” Seriously?

The genocide canard is the most infuriating lie told by progressives, even though it’s easily dispelled by citing the many things Israel did to protect Palestinian civilians from harm during its counterattack. But that doesn’t matter; the chuckleheads waving the “genocide” banner ignore both vocabulary and history, so eager are they to smear Israel. (You never hear them accusing Hamas of genocide.) As Maher says, that Big Lie is not only wrong, but also promotes antisemitism:

“Gaza equals genocide is a lie—an easily provable lie.  And the fact that so many prominent Democrats get along with it is to me, the party’s worst moment since they ended Reconstruction after the Civil War.”

“This is where antisemitism is coming from.  . . because if you really think someone is committing genocide, of course you have full permission to hate them.  And history shows, for whatever reason, when it comes to hating the Jews, people don’t need a lot of permission.”

The guest whose faces and applause appear in this segment are Max Brooks, an author, actor, and historian, and Sarah Longwell:. a conservative publisher and political strategist. 

I should add that I tweeted this segment yesterday, and the antisemites came out in droves. It’s scary, but also evidence that Jew hatred is more pervasive than we—or at least I—know. Have a look at the comments on this tweet (click on it):

Sometimes I feel that these people wouldn’t be happy unless either Israel never fought back against terrorism, or in fact disappeared from the face of the Earth.

Sunday: Hili dialogue

September 13, 2026 • 6:45 am

Welcome to Sunday, September 13, 2026; it’s the last day of Rosh Hashanah, the Jewish New Year, which ends at sunset.

It’s also National Peanut Day, celebrating a legume best eaten in two forms: peanut butter and as boiled green peanuts. It’s nearly impossible to get the latter anywhere besides roadside stands in the South, but if you see a sign like the one below, stop immediately and buy some. They taste nothing like regular peanuts, but are terrific. This was taken (and peanuts consumed) on a seminar trip I gave in early 2013. That was the trip when I had to have a bodyguard (packing heat) when I lectured on evolution at the Augusta Public Library. Sure enough, two people (unarmed) charged the stage. I was talking only about evolution!

It’s also Bald Is Beautiful Day, International Chocolate Day, National Cachaça Day, celebrating Brazil’s iconic drink, Snack a Pickle Day (half sours for me) and Fortune Cookie Day.

Here’s a pastrami sandwich from the famous and overtouristed Katz’s Deli in NYC. It’s expensive and crowded, but their pastrami is excellent, and you get plenty of pickles. (Katz’s is of course the site of the famous “fake orgasm” scene from the movie “When Harry Met Sally”. The woman who says to the waiter afterwards, “I’ll have what she’s having,” is Estelle Reiner, the mother of director Rob Reiner.

Notice the half sours dominating the pickles, as well as the Dr. Brown’s Cel-Ray (celery-flavored soda), the must-have accompaniment to corned beef or pastrami.

If you haven’t read my essay in the Chronicle of Higher Education, “Jason Arday and the corruption of science”, it’s no longer paywalled and you can read it on the Chronicle’s Substack here for free.

Readers are welcome to mark notable events, births, or deaths on this day by consulting the September 13 Wikipedia page.

Da Nooz:

*Houthi terrorists, backed by Iran, seized an island in the southern narrows of the Red Sea, further cutting off movement of oil-carrying ships from the Middle East (article archived here).

The Iranian-backed Houthi militia seized an island in a choke point of the Red Sea after days of fierce fighting, two Yemeni government officials said Friday, giving Iran and its allies sway over the two main routes for shipping oil out of the Middle East.

The capture of Perim Island came as Saudi Arabia announced that it had shut down a critical oil pipeline, a day after Houthi forces swept into the strategic port city of Mokha in Yemen. Both were major setbacks for the Saudi kingdom, which exports most of its oil through the Red Sea. The kingdom’s foreign ministry said the pipeline was hit on Thursday by drones launched from Iraq.

Perim Island sits in the middle of the Bab al-Mandab Strait, the narrow pathway at the southern entrance to the Red Sea. Its seizure adds a new dimension in the war between the United States and Iran. The Islamic republic has already largely cut off the flow of oil through the Strait of Hormuz in the Persian Gulf and leveraged that influence to demand concessions from Washington.

Now, the Houthi militia, Iran’s ally, has a foothold at a bottleneck in the Red Sea and could further disrupt shipping there.

The island’s capture came after intense ground battles in Yemen as the Houthis have staged a lightning advance against forces allied with the internationally recognized Yemeni government, which is backed by Saudi Arabia. The kingdom has faced frequent Houthi attacks on its tankers and energy facilities, even as its leaders have tried to avoid a direct war with the group, analysts say.

Crown Prince Mohammed bin Salman of Saudi Arabia spoke to President Trump about the escalation in Yemen in calls this week, and urged the United States to take military action against the Houthis, according to officials with knowledge of the conversations. Mr. Trump told him he was not willing to do so, the officials said.

We don’t have the wherewithal to intitiate yet another war, but it would be nice if some of the allies helped, for, after all, they have to move their goods through the Red Sea and Suez Canal.

Here from Wikipedia is a map showing Perim Island in the Bab al-Mandab Strait, next to Cheikh Saïd peninsula of Yemen, with Djibouti and Eritrea to the west across the strait. A zoomed-out map is inset at the lower right. The distance from the island to Yemen is about 2-3 km, while that to the coast of Eritrea or Djibouti is about 26-30 km.  Not much space.

Archer90, CC BY-SA 3.0 via Wikimedia Commons

*According to the Guardian, this takeover is concurrent with about 50,000 Yemeni civilians fleeing before the advancing Houthi.

Nearly 50,000 people have fled a sudden advance by Houthi forces in western Yemen, with entire villages emptied and families trapped near frontline fighting with depleting food supplies, according to aid workers.

Civilians in the Middle East’s poorest country have found themselves victims of a global struggle for control over one of the most important shipping routes in the world, which threatens to turn Yemen’s on-off conflict into a forever war.

In a lightning advance this week, the Iran-backed Houthi militants have seized a string of towns along the Red Sea coast from forces aligned with the US- and Saudi-backed Yemeni government. Hundreds of people are reported to have been killed. Many fear a return to the full-scale civil war that killed 150,000 and brought many others to the brink of famine.

The UN International Organization for Migration (IOM) said on Friday that 46,000 people had been displaced across the governates of Taiz and Hodeidah, where steep verdant mountain ridges give way to arid coastal plains. For many families, this was their second or even third time they had been forced out of their homes.

A significant number of people were observed to be leaving the city with their belongings. Fighting has cut key roads, while phone lines are down in some areas. “The scale of displacement is increasing rapidly,” said Joe Lowry, IOM’s Middle East and north Africa spokesperson in Cairo.

. . .By taking control of key areas this week, including islands off the coast, the anti-west Houthis hope to gain a direct presence near the Bab al-Mandab strait, a 20-mile stretch of water and vital trade and energy route that connects Asia with Europe. ​

The strait’s name is roughly translated as “the gate of tears” or “the gate of grief”, and its strong currents and winds made the passage between the Arabian peninsula and Africa’s east coast hazardous for centuries. Modern-day cargo ships have no physical issue passing through.

​But if ​the Houthis were to close the natural chokepoint, the impact on the global economy could be disastrous. Ships would have to reroute around the southern tip of Africa, adding thousands of extra nautical miles. The fighting has already contributed to the price of oil rising above $100 a barrel after weeks when it was trading closer to $80.

More bad news, but we can’t let terrorists control the flow of shipping in the Middle East.

*The WSJ reports that Chinese support for Iran in its war with the U.S. and Israel has extended to the Chinese supplying Iran with high-resolution satellite images of a U.S. base in Jordan that Iran attacked several times with ballistic missiles.

Before Iran carried out its attack that killed three U.S. troops in July, Tehran acquired high-resolution satellite images of the base in Jordan from Chinese entities, according to U.S. officials familiar with details of the incident.

It is the clearest evidence so far that Chinese support for Iran during the war has had lethal consequences for U.S. forces, according to the officials, who say the U.S. has connected the imagery to the attack.

The U.S. officials declined to identify the Chinese entities that supplied the imagery to Iran and didn’t allege direct involvement by Beijing. Tehran procured the images both before and after the attack.

But the finding could deepen U.S.-China tensions ahead of the planned summit between President Trump and Chinese leader Xi Jinping on Sept. 24, after months of frustration with Beijing’s rejection of U.S. warnings about Chinese companies providing imagery to Iran.

Senior U.S. officials raised the imagery linked to the July 17 attack with their Chinese counterparts, who pushed back and demanded proof, the U.S. officials said. China has repeatedly dismissed Washington’s concerns, refusing to acknowledge that any Chinese companies are engaged in such activity, the officials said.

The strikes on the base came after senior Trump officials spent months warning their Chinese counterparts that Chinese companies were providing satellite imagery Iran could use to target U.S. personnel and assets in the region, officials say. The Trump administration sanctioned several Chinese companies in May, saying that supplying satellite imagery to Iran “threatens American and partner personnel.”

Within three days of the July attack, Iran released high-resolution images showing damage to three separate areas of the base. Publicly available lower-resolution satellite imagery analyzed by The Wall Street Journal showed damage to more than 20 structures across the three areas of the base.

Here are the images, with translation from the Farsi below:

New images of Iran’s damages to #America‘s assets in the region

Well if this doesn’t involve the government of China, I’d be very surprised.  Do NGOs in China have spy satellites, and sold the photos to the Iranians? Even if they did they’d need permission of the Chinese government.

*Douglas Murray, now a correspondent for the Free Press, analyzes the victory of the “far right” Alternative for Germany (“AfD”) party in one small state. His article is called “Who’s afraid of the ‘far right?“, with the subtitle, “German leaders enabled the rise of a populist party through their failures. Now those leaders cling to power by branding their challengers as extreme.”  As I suspected, the MSM has played down the role of immigration in Europe’s move to the right.

For people concerned with the future of Europe, the AfD is a vital as well as a special case. As such, it requires special attention. Unfortunately, most of the people writing about the party from outside Germany are intent on performing this feat of political analysis with all the care of a brain surgeon attempting to operate while wearing boxing gloves.

To start with, it is not the case that the AfD is a far-right party. Which is not to say that it does not have people within it who could be described as far right, or that it could not become such a party in the future.

There is a simple explanation for why the AfD has risen to become the leading opposition party in Germany: mass immigration, legal and illegal. But it took years for that issue to dominate. When the AfD was founded in 2013, it was mainly focused on addressing the fallout from the Eurozone crisis. The new party rejected the European Union’s extraordinarily optimistic belief that a single European currency could combine Greek balance sheets with German bookkeeping.

But in 2015, Chancellor Angela Merkel decided to open the gates of Europe and Germany to anyone from North Africa or the Middle East who wanted to walk in and call it home, particularly those fleeing the Syrian civil war. Normal border protocols were abandoned. More than a million migrants arrived in a matter of months. Germany, and in particular its welfare state, was overwhelmed by the surge and attempted, too late, to stem it. The vast majority of the arrivals from those years remain a net drain on the German state. In addition to this economic reality, a small but significant number of arrivals have brought extremism, terrorism, and petty as well as large-scale criminality. It might also be noted that the movement has brought a mass importation of antisemitism into a country that did not exactly need a boost in this area.

Given the extraordinary consensus that existed over the past decade among the mainstream parties of the right, center, and left, it was inevitable that some political movement would arise in Germany to point out and oppose the folly of Merkel’s policy. The AfD was well-placed to do so, and, in time, the economists who had dominated the party in its early years were replaced by people who believed that immigration was the number one challenge facing Germany.

Their success in the years since 2015 has been remarkable

. . .But in 2015, Chancellor Angela Merkel decided to open the gates of Europe and Germany to anyone from North Africa or the Middle East who wanted to walk in and call it home, particularly those fleeing the Syrian civil war. Normal border protocols were abandoned. More than a million migrants arrived in a matter of months. Germany, and in particular its welfare state, was overwhelmed by the surge and attempted, too late, to stem it. The vast majority of the arrivals from those years remain a net drain on the German state. In addition to this economic reality, a small but significant number of arrivals have brought extremism, terrorism, and petty as well as large-scale criminality. It might also be noted that the movement has brought a mass importation of antisemitism into a country that did not exactly need a boost in this area.

Given the extraordinary consensus that existed over the past decade among the mainstream parties of the right, center, and left, it was inevitable that some political movement would arise in Germany to point out and oppose the folly of Merkel’s policy. The AfD was well-placed to do so, and, in time, the economists who had dominated the party in its early years were replaced by people who believed that immigration was the number one challenge facing Germany.

Their success in the years since 2015 has been remarkable.

. . . It is for these reasons, among others, that the foreign coverage of Germany’s political shifts is so unsatisfactory. In the aftermath of this weekend’s election, the easiest thing in the world is to say—as almost every headline writer has—that “the far-right AfD” won the regional election. The fact that these same publications, from the BBC to The New York Times, rarely, if ever, use the same scary monikers to describe far-left parties gaining support across the continent is a matter for another day. But the hope appears to be that the public will be sufficiently uninterested in the details and that the prospect of the Nazis returning will be enough to spook readers into reflexive opposition.

. . . If all opposition to the migration crisis can be said to be the work of German neo-Nazis, then Europe is lost. Because no party of opposition will be untainted. If Germany can be saved, then Europe can be saved. But in order for that to happen, people—including the international press—need to listen to what is actually happening in Germany, take notice, and recognize the situation as it is, not the strange Nazi-haunted fever dream that they curiously seem to wish it to be.

The problem of course is that the Western MSM, at least of the liberal stripe, is afraid of saying the I-word, much less recognizing the effect on people of mass immigration, often of people who simply don’t integrate into European society. Ergo the movement of nearly every country in Europe to the right.  If people don’t wake up and at least recognize the problems, including the drain on local economies and the erosion of Western institutions and values, Europe as we know it will be gone when the next generation of children grows up.

*When I was a kid, I was allowed to walk to and from elementary school starting when I was about 9 years old, and that was a longish walk along major roads. I was also allowed, when I got home, to get on my bike and go visit friends. Those days are gone: such unsupervised activity by children is regarding as endangering them, even though the rate of such endangerment has dropped as the rules get toughter. In early June a mother in Williamsburg, Virginia let her five-year-old walk alone a half mile to a pond in their gated and security-patrolled community in Virginia; his goal was to collect goose feathers. She was summarily arrested, charged with contributing to the delinquency of a minor (!), and given a six-month suspended jail sentence. This is the subject of a WaPo op-ed called, “A 5-year-old’s nighborhood walk shouldn’t be a crime” (article archived here).

While everyone wants kids to grow up healthy and happy, people have different ideas about how to achieve that. Until the past generation or so, a sunny upbringing usually included a fair amount of free, unsupervised time. One book I cherish from 1981, “Your Six-Year-Old: Loving and Defiant,” provides a checklist of the things a neurotypical child was expected to be able to do upon entering first grade. “Can he count eight to ten pennies correctly?” and “Can he tell left hand from right?” Perhaps the most salient query: “Can he travel alone in the neighborhood (four to eight blocks) to store, school, playground, or to a friend’s home?”

Compare that with a survey released this year by the Institute for Family Studies, which asked nearly 24,000 parents at what age they’d let their kids do things on their own. Eleven percent of 14-year-olds aren’t able to leave the house unsupervised. Fifty-five percent can’t go beyond their block. In other words, today’s high school freshmen have a fraction of the freedom that used to be given to first-graders. It’s little wonder they’re so anxious.

This new, limited idea of what kids are capable of explains why a 5-year-old walking around his neighborhood at lunchtime can look like a baby crawling along I-95 at midnight. Thanks to Karyann’s transgression — trusting her son — she was placed on Virginia’s child abuse and neglect registry for seven years. In court, she was found guilty of “contributing to the delinquency of a minor” — a Class 1 misdemeanor — and given a six-month suspended jail sentence.

. . . over the years, parents started to contact me when they got penalized for giving their kids the same freedom they’d grown up with. That included Brittany Patterson of Fannin County, Georgia, who was arrested when her son, 10, walked to town without telling her. Mallerie Shirley received similar treatment when she was investigated after her son, 6, rode his scooter unsupervised in Atlanta. Danielle and Alexander Meitiv were likewise investigated for letting their kids, 6 and 10, walk home from a park in Silver Spring, Maryland.

Those stories and others have thankfully given the public pause. They’ve helped move 13 states to pass “reasonable childhood independence” laws, which clarify that “neglect” happens only when kids are put in serious, obvious danger, not any time their parents take their eyes off them. Rep. Blake Moore (R-Utah) and Rep. Jennifer McClellan (D-Virginia) are seeking to enshrine that protection nationwide with their Promoting Childhood Independence and Resilience Act.

When Karyann let her son collect feathers, she wasn’t ignoring danger. She was ignoring cultural norms that are keeping kids indoors, and parents in fear. For the sake of our families and our collective mental health: Let kids roam.

Let the kids roam!!!!

Meanwhile in Dobrzyn, Szaron isn’t going on the beat:

Hili: You were supposed to go on your rounds.
Szaron: I changed my mind, I’ll sit here with you for a while.

In Polish:

Hili: Miałeś iść na obchód.
Szaron: Rozmyśliłem się, posiedzą sobie tutaj razem z tobą.

*******************

From Merilee:

From Wholesome Memes:

And Bat sent this amazing image from the International Space Station showing the 9/11 attacks on New York City; it appeared on Space.com. 

A quote:

Frank Culbertson had a birds-eye view of one of the most memorable and tragic events in American history.

The NASA astronaut was the only American off of Earth on Sept. 11, 2001. He was circling the planet aboard the International Space Station (ISS) when terrorists flew commercial jets into the twin towers of the World Trade Center in New York City, killing more than 2,700 people.

The ISS passed over New York shortly after the attacks took place, so Culbertson saw the devastation from an eerie remove. He shared his thoughts with Mission Control at NASA’s Johnson Space Center in real time, chronicling the tragedy like no one else could.

satellite photo of a large city on a bay, with a river running through it and smoke rising from the center of the city

The aftermath of the 9/11 attacks on the World Trace Center in New York City, as seen by the astronauts onboard the International Space Station on Sept. 11, 2001. (Image credit: NASA)

“We could see New York City and the smoke from the fires,” Culbertson said. “Our prayers and thoughts go out to all the people there and everywhere else here — I’m looking up and down the East Coast to see if I can see anything else — and to the people in Washington.”

There’s more information at the site.

From Masih, who’s rightly pleased at the progress she’s inspired.

Translation from the Farsi:

There’s no greater pleasure than seeing your efforts bear fruit—watch closely, brave woman: you were alone and singular here, but now women like you have multiplied, because courage is contagious! From 2014 until today, I was cursed at and attacked for launching campaigns against compulsory veiling and calling on women to send videos of themselves unveiled. Thousands of women in Iran were attacked for removing their veils and engaging in civil disobedience. We faced mass assaults from all sides for “White Wednesdays,” for “Our Camera Is Our Weapon”—assaults from those who were the minority! They arrested us, beat us, threw us in prison, threatened us, sent assassins abroad to murder us, and said this resistance was pointless. But today, every woman who walks unveiled in the streets is a continuation of that same disobedience. This isn’t just about removing a piece of fabric; it’s about reclaiming control over a woman’s body, life, and dignity, and tearing down the wall of fear. Compulsory veiling may still be law on paper, but in the streets of Iran, women have been issuing its death sentence for years. We are the echo of each other’s voices, and we persist until the day of liberation. These videos are from the #دوربین_ما_اسلحه_ما  [“our camera is our weapon”] campaign and are being reposted to humiliate the zealots who these days are rampant on Twitter and Instagram, railing against women’s free dress in Iran’s streets—so they can understand the rugged, winding path Iranian women have traveled, and that we never give an inch!

From Luana; two tweets showing double-takes of people who learn that the holdout juror in the Lindsay Clancy case was black (and male):

Here is a stupefied “non-practicing white”. What doest that mean?

Larry was left out at first!

From Malcolm; cats doing the crab walk:

Two from my feed. LOOK AT THE SIZE OF THIS EAGLE!

An “awwww!” moment:

One I reposted from The Auschwitz Memorial:

And one from Doctor Cobb in Manchester; a beautiful potter wasp:

Red DevilPotter wasp in Lanzarote Canary Islands 🇮🇨 Canon R5 and Sigma 150mm f2.8 macroSS1/3200 F7.1 ISO3200#macro #wasp # insect # arthropod #entolomology

@macro_action (@birdzandbees.bsky.social) 2026-09-11T19:15:26.158Z