The backlash grows against crime - and spreads to entire races

 

I think President Trump spoke for the majority of Americans in his comments yesterday about the murder of a young Ukrainian woman on a North Carolina transit system.  His statement is very brief, but I hope all my readers will take a couple of minutes to listen to it.

An equally tragic situation is arising in terms of relations between racial and ethnic groups in this country.  More and more people are unequivocally equating criminal violence with black crime and black violence.  Eric S. Raymond pointed out yesterday:

The part of me that was once an idealistic anti-racist liberal marching for civil rights died its final death last night as I watched the video of Irina Zarutska on the Charlotte light rail, being  fatally stabbed in the throat from behind by a black savage I refuse to name.

What has finally broken me is, incidents like that aren't even a surprise anymore. The frequency of brutal, senseless murders by "African-Americans", both individually and in predatory mobs, has risen exactly as rapidly as social and coercive controls on their behavior have weakened.

Meanwhile, for anybody who's wondering, American whites still have about the same crime rate as Switzerland. When enforcement of norms disintegrates, only intelligent people with low time preference still act civilized. 

As I've watched us sliding down the civilizational failure gradient, the question I've been increasingly unable to dismiss is this: was the whole ugly apparatus of racial repression - segregation, sundown towns, lynchings - really just senseless hatred? Or was it a rational containment strategy evolved under pressure from living alongside a large, visually distinct population of low-IQ savages?

I think I know the answer now.  And I hate knowing it. I preferred my innocence.

It doesn't do any good to protest that this particular savage was "mentally ill", whatever you think that means. The mobs that routinely form to beat up and kill whites unwary enough to wander onto their turf aren't psychotic, unless all Blacks are psychotic. 

Yes, yes, I know. If you were to select a population of whites for the same distribution of IQ and time preference as American Blacks, and then coddle them, scholarship out their brightest kids for four generations, and tell them all of their failures are society's fault, you'd get the same level of pathology and violence in about the time it took you to say "dyscultural and dysgenic".

That doesn't matter. We're not dealing with that hypothetical. We're dealing with reality. The reality is that we have a predation problem that will only be solved when our actual population of low IQ savages is contained again. Creatures like Irina's murderer, cognitively unable to participate in civilization, must be subject to either segregation or repression so brutal that they live in fear of it.

I don't really want to live in the kind of society that can do either these things. But Irina Zarutska's murder is the seal on my realization that there are no longer soft options, only hard choices.

I'd prefer the one where armed citizens routinely shoot down creatures like that at the time of the attempted crime, or immediately after it. All the alternatives seem far worse.

I've devoted much of my life to fighting the evils of racism and bigotry.  I bear the physical scars of that struggle on my body and in my mind.  I've written about them on occasion in these pages, as regular readers will know.  I absolutely hate reading such words from a balanced, sane commenter like Eric Raymond . . . but I know he's merely voicing the reactions of a great many Americans from other racial groups.  They're beginning to blame all blacks for the actions and attitudes of criminal blacks.  Given the number of cities that tolerate such offenders as the Charlotte murderer, it's almost impossible to advance a meaningful counter-argument.  There are simply too many such criminals out there, and unless and until they're dealt with, permanently, in the eyes of other racial and ethnic groups they will continue to drag their own race down into the ordure in which they swim.

When trying to help the victims of racial and ethnic violence in Africa, I had to learn (the hard way) that the only way to protect innocent victims was to end the onslaught of their (and my) violent predatory enemies, any way I had to.  I was a priest, and worked with many other priests.  The only ones who were effective ministers of the Gospel were those who realized that when Christ commanded his followers to buy a sword if they didn't own one, he wasn't joking.  We bought the modern equivalent of swords, and we used them to keep our flocks safe.  It felt very weird (at first) to be wearing a gun beneath my vestments, or have one stashed close to hand in case of need, but it was necessary under the circumstances, and many of us did so.  How many Americans are willing to contemplate their pastors and clergy doing likewise in today's society?  Unless we can put an end to this senseless criminal violence, congregations all over the country may have to make that choice.

May God have mercy on the victims, and may the guilty be brought to justice and condign punishment:  and may those who tolerate, support and encourage the guilty suffer the same consequences.

Peter

This is long overdue!

 

Thanks to insane regulations that forbid prisons to jam cellphone signals, inmates have for decades (literally) been using smuggled cellphones to operate crime networks and organize specific crimes from behind bars.  We've known they're doing it, but the regulators have always insisted that cellphone frequencies may not be jammed for any reason.

At long last, that looks to be changing.

WASHINGTON, Sept. 5, 2025 – The Federal Communications Commission may soon give state and local prisons authority Congress has repeatedly declined to grant.

FCC Chairman Brendan Carr said Friday the commission will vote Sept. 30 on a proposal to let state and local prisons jam contraband cell phones - effectively cutting off the smuggled devices inmates use to communicate with the outside world. Carr stressed it would be voluntary and not a federal mandate to jam.

“Contraband cell phones are the root of so many evils taking place, not just in prisons, but across the country, for the crimes that people are phoning in and enabling,” Carr said, speaking at the Arkansas Attorney General’s office in Little Rock, following a tour of Varner Prison. “We need to do something about this serious threat to public safety.”

Carr said the proposal would sidestep federal law by declaring that calls from contraband cell phones are not “authorized communications” under 47 U.S.C. § 333, the statute that bars jamming. By de-authorizing those communications inside prisons, the FCC would clear the way for state and local facilities to deploy targeted jamming technology without running afoul of federal restrictions.

“Once contraband cell phone use is not an ‘authorized communication,' then the federal law is no longer a prohibition to jamming it, and that's well within the FCC authority to give that reading to federal law,” Carr said.

There's more at the link.

When I worked as a prison chaplain, I became aware of more than a few major crimes (up to and including murder) that were clandestinely arranged between inmates and their families and gangs outside the walls.  Even though that was a couple of decades ago, and modern miniaturized cellphones (much more easily concealed than the bigger, old-fashioned bricks) did not exist at the time, the cellular network was an increasingly important element in those arrangements.  With modern phones and encrypted communications apps, it's become a nightmare to keep track of what's going on.  This decision should be a major benefit to law enforcement in shutting down some of the worst of the worst criminals, who've regarded incarceration as simply a better-protected way for them to do business (because inside prison walls, their enemies outside find it, not impossible, but harder to get at them).

Peter

Asking for your help, dear readers

 

Regular readers will know that I've been battling multiple health issues for almost 3 years.  They led to an interruption in writing books, because I simply couldn't concentrate well enough to produce what I consider acceptable work.  I've also been blogging less frequently, for the same reason.

Last year I underwent four kidney procedures in an effort to overcome nephrotic syndrome, which first revealed itself as a severe case of hydronephrosis.  The situation was not helped by an incompetent urologist who subjected me to three procedures and then declared me cured.  He was wrong.  Fortunately, I could feel things still weren't right and insisted on a second opinion, which led to a fourth procedure to see what could be salvaged.  Sadly, although the last procedure brought temporary relief, it couldn't resurrect my right kidney;  so, later this month, it's coming out.  I hope that'll be the end of my kidney problems.  (Humans can live with only one kidney, provided it works normally;  so I'll be hoping for the best!)

About three years ago my partly disabling spinal injury, suffered more than two decades ago, began to give me more trouble:  increased pain (lately greatly increased), impaired mobility, and other issues.  Treating this has been complicated (understatement!) by legal issues.  The original injury was work-related, and treated by workers compensation;  but they closed the case in due course, and aren't about to reopen it unless it can be proved beyond doubt that any new problems are directly and immediately related to that injury.  Medical insurance, on the other hand, insist that since there's an older work-related injury in the same area as my current problems, the two must obviously be related, so workers comp should be paying for treatment.  I'm caught in the middle fighting two different sets of bureaucrats, both of which want to ensure that they don't pay for anything.  Lawyers are now involved, and it'll almost certainly have to be dealt with in court in due course.  However, treatment can't wait until the paperwork stops flying.

My wife and I have taken steps as best we can to carry the load so far.  We've mobilized our savings, and taken out a second mortgage on our home.  A very generous reader also donated a significant amount of money last year, which helped us pay for one of the surgical procedures on my kidney.  However, even after all of that, we're still facing a very large medical bill this year (possibly running into next year).  Spinal surgery is very expensive.  The lowest quote I've been able to get (hospitals being notoriously reticent to provide actual cost numbers in advance) is $49,625 for the surgery alone (i.e. surgeon's fees, anesthesia, use of operating theater, etc.), excluding:

• Diagnostic costs;
• Hardware or implants that may be required;
• Overnight or longer hospital stays;
• Post-surgical rehabilitation and physical therapy;
• The cost of treating any complications that may result.

All those expenses are over and above the surgery, and also for our account.  Total costs may exceed $80,000, according to those who've been through this before.  (I emphasize again that this is the lowest quote I've been able to obtain.  Others are significantly higher, exceeding six figures in all.  "Medical tourism" may be a cheaper alternative, but high-quality medical care remains expensive, even in the Third World.  Furthermore, long flights with a newly-repaired spine are sure to be very uncomfortable, and may be medically inadvisable.)

Therefore, I'm turning to you, dear readers.  If you enjoy this blog, and/or you've enjoyed my books, will you please consider helping us meet these expenses?  We've done our best to meet them according to our abilities, but even using the lowest quoted costs, we're going to be up to $50,000 short.  (If we eventually get something from either workers comp or medical insurance to pay some or all of our expenses, we'll use that to clear any remaining medical debt, then donate the rest to help someone else in our position.  We're far from alone in dueling with medical bureaucracies, we know!)

We've started a fundraiser at GiveSendGo, which appears to be one of the most honest and reliable services of its kind.  You can click on the link provided, or on the top link in the sidebar of this blog, to be taken there.  My wife and I will be very grateful for any support you can provide.

Thanks, friends.  God bless you all.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 277

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

Sunday morning music

 

A couple of weeks ago I posted Nickelback's self-parodying sea shanty version of their hit "Rockstar".  Readers seemed to enjoy it, and a number expressed an interest in more "modernized" sea shanties.

While looking for more, I came across Jonathan Young's album of heavy metal sea shanties.  Some I enjoyed, others less so, but they're certainly a very contemporary look at a time-honored musical tradition.  Here are a few of them, some old, some relatively new, in no particular order.

If you enjoyed these, you'll find much more of Mr. Young's music on his YouTube channel, and at his Web site.

Peter

So much for customer service

 

Quoth The Raven laments its death, and sees an opportunity.

Everywhere you go, everything you do, every service you pay for—it feels like customer service simply no longer exists. And even worse, most places you go actually make you feel like an asshole for daring to be a customer in the first place. I catch myself constantly asking, “Why am I putting up with this shit?” right before looking down at the Cheez-Doodles or baseball cap I’ve somehow convinced myself I can’t live without.

Because here’s the ugly truth: service is dead. The only thing still alive is the endless, humiliating upsell and self-service. The drugstore, the bank, the dentist—it doesn’t matter. On a given day I interact with supposedly “best-in-class” businesses, and nearly every time I walk away feeling bent over a barrel. And this is when I’m choosing the premium option. The premium experience is still garbage.

Which is why, when I think about the future, I don’t see the next big opportunity as another buzzy app or sleek new product. It’s customer service. Full stop. Any company, in any industry, that actually treats its customers like human beings will have me throwing money at their doorstep.

. . .

God forbid I need to call anyone about anything. Changing an airline ticket? Calling my credit card company? Forget it. Every road leads to an automated voice system with the warmth of a Soviet switchboard. Look, I get it. It’s 2025. Most stuff can be handled online, and that’s great—I don’t want to talk to anyone if I don’t have to. But when I do need a human being—because no, chatbot Karen, you cannot solve this problem with a “help article”—there should be a way to reach one without descending into phone tree purgatory.

Then there’s the pièce de résistance: self-checkout. Bill Burr has a bit about stealing from self-checkout as payback for being conscripted into a job you never applied for. And honestly, he’s right. You’re not a customer anymore—you’re an unpaid employee scanning your own groceries while the one overworked human employee hovers like a prison guard, ready to pounce if you don’t place the cantaloupe in the “bagging area” fast enough. You’re damn right I’m stealing a bag. And I dare your lazy ass to chase me down Market Street to stop me.

So yes, customer service isn’t dying—it’s dead. Buried. Cremated. Scattered to the wind. What’s left is a charade where companies pretend to offer “premium experiences” while nickel-and-diming you, automating you into oblivion, and treating your desire for basic service like an outrageous demand.

The opportunity is there for any business bold enough to zig while everyone else zags. Charge me more, fine. But make me feel like a customer, not a nuisance. Make me feel like I’m buying something, not auditioning for an FBI background check. Because until that happens? We’re all just paying top dollar to be reminded—daily—of how little most corporations actually think of their customers.

There's more at the link.

The corollary, of course, is that companies and businesses that emphasize customer service tend to do well at the best of times, and in more difficult economic conditions (like right now) still have enough customers to keep their heads above water.  A good example is the butchery my wife and I use.  The owner is friendly to everyone, goes out of his way to make sure we get the cuts and quality of meat we want, and will take time and trouble for special orders if we're willing to pay for them.  I just ordered about thirty pounds of assorted meats from him, in one-pound packages, including some that's not often ordered by his typical clientele and cut in a specific way.  He quoted me a price about a dollar or two per pound over supermarket prices, but the quality of his meat and the extra care he puts into satisfying our needs make that a bargain, as far as we're concerned.  Because he's willing to go the extra mile for us, we're willing to pay the extra dollar or two.  Everyone's happy.

The same applies to many of the businesses we patronize as a family.  We actively look for vendors who will listen to us and provide what we want.  If they do that, we give them our money and recommend them to our friends.  If they don't - if we're just another body or two off the street to them - then we have no reason in particular to shop there, and no reason in particular to go back.  I've taken to writing to businesses such as medical offices, etc. where I find myself treated like just another digit in the system.  I complain about it, give examples of how they treated me, and inform them that I'll be looking for more professional care somewhere else.  A few care enough to respond.  Most don't seem to care at all.  They're too busy being good little bureaucrats in the health care machine.

We surely can't be the only people operating that way.  How about you, readers?  Do you actively look for good customer service, let them know you appreciate it, and recommend them to others?  Or doesn't it matter that much any more?  I'd like to hear your perspective.

Peter

Do it!

 

I note with satisfaction that the Epstein "victims" are threatening to release the names of those who victimized them.

Jeffrey Epstein’s victims have told Donald Trump they are compiling a list of men who were clients of the paedophile financier.

Survivors gathered outside the Capitol on Wednesday to demand that his administration authorise the release of all of the documents it holds on Epstein.

Lisa Phillips, who was abused by Epstein from 2000, said she and other victims will produce their own client list if the US government fails to publish the names of wealthy clients believed to be connected to Epstein’s crimes.

. . .

Ms Phillips added: “We know the names, many of us were abused by them. Now, together as survivors, we will confidentially compile the names we all know who were regularly in the Epstein world.”

Republican Marjorie Taylor Greene, an ally of Donald Trump who is working with Democrats on a bipartisan bill to secure the release of the files, said she would read the list of co-conspirators and abusers to Congress.

Noting that Epstein’s survivors would struggle to publicly disclose the list of names over fears of the potential ramifications, she said: “Yeah, it’s a scary thing to name names, but I will tell you, I’m not afraid to name names.”

There's more at the link.

Given suitable safeguards to prevent innocent people from being falsely accused, I think this is a very good idea.  One could protect against abuse by naming only people who are remembered by two, or three, or more of the women, so that it isn't a "he said, she said" case, but one with multiple witnesses and/or victims.  One could also remind them, prior to publication, that false accusations can lead to both civil and criminal charges against those making them, so they'd better be willing and able to back up their claims.  Given those and similar measures, I can't see a downside to this.

I'm prepared to believe that President Trump's people in the Department of Justice have not found "smoking gun" evidence to convict anyone of complicity in Epstein's crimes - but that's only because their predecessors, and some of those still in the DOJ, have carefully erased or hidden that evidence.  The cover-up has been massive.  Anyone who believes that Epstein committed suicide in his prison cell has got to be so naive as to defy credulity.  "Blissninny" just about covers it.

As far as Epstein's crimes are concerned, we haven't even scratched the surface yet in determining culpability and punishing offenders.  It's long overdue.

Peter

Medical news I had no need to hear

 

CNN brings us this life-changing news headline:

Using the phone while you poop

greatly raises hemorrhoid risk, new study says

Of all the medical information I never expected to hear (or need, for that matter), I daresay that has to rank pretty high up the list.  Didn't we have enough strain in our lives already?

Oh, well.  To quote the Moody Blues, "Face piles of trials with smiles"!

Peter

Following the medical money (or lack thereof)

 

A few weeks ago I wrote an article titled "From 'Medical Care' to 'Medical Couldn't Care Less'."  In it, speaking about conflicting medical bureaucracies with whom I'm having to deal at present, I said:

Neither bureaucracy cares about me (or any other patient) as a person.  They're just ticking off the boxes on their forms, checking their reams of regulations, and putting their organizations' interests ahead of anything and anyone else.

That's being driven home yet again by the latest medical shenanigans.  I'm in pretty severe pain (all the time) from a deteriorating spinal condition, but no doctor or nurse seems interested in speeding things up to get to a point where that could be alleviated.  Instead it's fill out this form, get that test, make follow-up appointments (which they then cancel because I haven't yet completed all the tests they want - but they don't tell me that until less than 24 hours before my appointment), and so on.  What's worse is that medical insurance is an integral part of the problem, in that they won't discuss further treatment until a series of tests are completed, even if those tests have nothing whatsoever to do, medically speaking, with the specific health issue under discussion.  The forms have to be completed, with all the boxes ticked off, even if some of those boxes apply to other conditions.  If I complain and argue about it, I'll be frozen out of the process until I knuckle under.

The problem is, all of this costs money - and with competing bureaucracies arguing over who is or is not responsible for the bills, I have to pay for everything up front, in the hope of getting at least some of the money back from one or the other agency in due course.  The fact that such costs run into thousands of dollars is irrelevant, as far as the bureaucrats are concerned.  I have to get the tests done;  if I can't afford to have them done, I won't be approved to proceed to further treatment options (for which they still won't pay, at least at present) through their bureaucratic processes.  If I can persuade doctors to offer the treatment(s) I need without medical insurance pre-approval, it'll have to be on a cash basis, in the hope that subsequent discussions with my lawyer might persuade the insurers to contribute something towards them.

I'm going to have my right kidney removed towards the end of this month (the culmination of the kidney problems I had last year, with four lesser surgeries having failed to correct the situation).  It'll take me a couple of months to get over that, I'm told, so back surgery will have to be on hold until I've fully recovered my strength.  If I can raise the money for that, it should happen late this year or early next year, if I can get my medical ducks in a row.

I'm going to be launching a fundraiser within the next week or so to ask for help in meeting these expenses.  This is a very costly situation for us. We're in the process of taking out a second mortgage on our home, and we've saved what we can to meet initial expenses, but we're still looking at a looming fiscal cliff in the not too distant future.  I know we're far from alone in facing that sort of problem:  I've mentioned others' fundraisers in these pages on occasion.  Thank you to everyone who's already been generous.  We couldn't have made it this far without you.

Peter

Boom, or impending bust?

 

Ted Gioia is worried about the state of the economy, and the mixed signals from higher levels that are conflicting with data "on the ground".

Are we entering an AI-driven boom time like an out-of-control Monopoly game? Or will we be too broke to eat breakfast?

Let’s try to answer this question—because a lot is at stake in getting the answer right.

I see signs of economic turmoil everywhere in the real world:

• Starbucks sales are down and they are closing 100 stores.
• KFC and Pizza Hut sales are down in the US.
• Dozens of other restaurant chains are closing locations.
• Las Vegas tourism is down sharply and visitors describe it as a ghost town.
• In fact, the entire hotel and hospitality industry is shrinking.
• There are now a half million more homes for sale in the US than home buyers.
• Credit card debt is rising—and is now back at its all-time high.
• US unemployment is the highest it’s been since the pandemic.
• The jobs data was so bad that the person compiling the numbers got fired!

Companies are getting desperate, and they can’t hide it. A friend reports that Pizza Hut sent him a promotion on Tuesday morning, offering a two dollar pizza. He wondered how they could possibly make money on this deal.

And then that same day he got a notice from competitor Papa John’s, also promising a two buck pizza.

Two bucks for a pizza? Really?

This is how businesses respond when customers totally disappear. They will do anything to bring them back. Otherwise they have to shut down.

And this is a reality untouched by promises of an AI boom time. It’s everywhere in the real world where flesh-and-blood people live and work.

Mr. Gioia goes on to note five important points about the so-called AI "boom":

1. Half of the gains in the stock market are due to just five stocks.
2. These companies are betting everything on the buildout of AI data centers.
3. There’s no indication that consumers are willing to pay for this enormous infrastructure.
4. The reality is that nobody can afford the proposed AI data center buildout.
5. And there are all sorts of other warning signs—energy usage, water consumption, etc.

He concludes:

By any reasonable measure, the current trend is unsustainable. And there’s one thing I know about unsustainable trends—there’s a day of reckoning, and it’s not a happy one for the people who caused it. But, even sadder, they take down a lot of others with them when the bubble bursts.

There's more at the link, including some informative and worrying graphics to illustrate his points.

If you've followed our discussions in these pages over the past few years, you won't be surprised by any of this.  Previous administrations have spent us into near-bankruptcy, and papered over the fiscal cracks with almost unlimited treasury bond sales and other measures.  Our deficit is so high it's almost impossible to visualize:  and as always, excessive debt becomes a drag on the economy as a whole, both for those who caused it and those who simply happen to be in the same country.  Sooner or later, our economic chickens will come home to roost, and some (like myself) think that won't be long delayed.

I hope I'm wrong.  I really do.  It would be wonderful to think that President Trump will be given enough time to stave off the crisis, and do what's needed to begin restoring our economy . . . but I somehow suspect that the damage is already too great.  He'll paper over the cracks as best he can, but no matter how good his policies may be, he's not a miracle-worker.  (He also contributed to the problem by not controlling deficit spending during his first term of office.  He gets a great deal of credit for his current policies, but also a share of the blame for the mess leading up to the present situation.)

Go read Mr. Gioia's whole article.  Food for thought.

Peter

So where's the justice in this sentence???

 

I was infuriated to read about an extraordinarily lenient sentence in a child sex abuse case.

Just hours after her first day of high school, a 15-year-old girl sat in a Fremont County courtroom and told a full gallery of people, both known to her and not, about her life from the ages of 7 to 12, when she was being sexually assaulted.

Candon Dean Dahle, 22, was sentenced by District Judge Steven Boyce to a minimum of five and a maximum of ten years in prison. Boyce then suspended the sentence and placed Dahle on probation for eight years.

He was also given a 180-day local jail sentence that began on Tuesday. After that, he will be required to complete 200 hours of community service.

There's more at the link.

The source article contains sickening evidence from the victim and her family of what this man's abuse did to her, the psychological effects of which will probably continue for the rest of her life.  I won't publish that here, because I try to keep this blog family-friendly, but if you can stomach that sort of thing, I urge you to click over there and read it for yourself.

For the life of me, I can't understand how such a monster in human form could be let off with so light a sentence.  There are parts of the world - including many in Africa, from where I come - that wouldn't have left him alive after doing things like that.  People there wouldn't wait for the courts to give him a slap on the wrist.  They'd administer rather more than a slap on the wrist to make sure he never did it again, and so that anyone else with ideas like that would be given a graphic example of why they should never, ever even consider putting their ideas into practice.

Furthermore, I've never yet seen a single case where a child abuser was "cured" of his "disease" by any therapy, program or punishment.  I've had to deal with far too many of them as a prison chaplain.  Even those who'd sincerely, genuinely repented of their sin would tell me that they didn't know if they could refrain from doing it again after they finished their sentence.  They said that for them, temptation sometimes grew so great that it amounted to an irresistible compulsion, so much so that some of them actively considered suicide as the only way they believed they could avoid acting on it.  I somehow doubt that Mr. Dahle will prove any different.

I'd call him a complete and utter waste of oxygen, except that I'd then have to apply the same description to the judge who let him off so lightly, and the prosecutors who plea-bargained his offense down so greatly.  I suspect society would be better off without any of them.

Peter

The day they blew up a river to save Yellowstone

 

I came across a very interesting article about the 1988 wildfires in and around Yellowstone National Park (the biggest and most dangerous in the Park's history), and how local farmers, ranchers and residents partnered with the National Park Service to save West Yellowstone from the encroaching flames.  Here are some excerpts.

The plan was to surround West Yellowstone with irrigation pipes and sprinklers to dampen the ground, stopping any flames before they reached homes and businesses. As the park’s busiest gateway community, ensuring West Yellowstone’s survival was critical.

Howell and several other farmers hauled all the industrial-sized irrigation pipe they had available to West Yellowstone, but that wouldn’t be enough to stop the fire.

The critical factor was finding an adequate water source to feed the pipes.

To pump water through the pipes, they needed a hole — and fast.

There wasn’t time to excavate the bank of the river, so they blasted it with explosives.

. . .

Bryers ... cut any trees that had fallen or were leaning into the trail to ensure large vehicles and their irrigation pipes could reach the river.

There was a surprise waiting for Bryers when he emerged from the forest at the riverbank: Yellowstone District Ranger Joseph Evans.

“Joe was scratching his head as I came out of the opening in an orange Ford truck,” Bryers said. “He said, ‘You can't be driving in here and using chainsaws.’ So I go, ‘I can't believe you haven't heard. I'm clearing the way for a big line of diesel trucks hauling pipe.’”

Despite having the full permission of the NPS and Clyde Seely, the fire commander, nobody had informed Evans that Bryer would be cutting through Yellowstone’s trees to get to the Madison River.

“He went off to see what in the world was happening,” Bryers said. “There was a lot of miscommunication back then.”

. . .

Soon, an unassuming Ryder rental truck arrived at the western bank of the river. Inside was a large amount of detonating cord, supplied by the federal government, that would be used to create the crater.

“They did one blast, and it turned out it wasn't quite enough to make the crater they needed,” Bryers said. “So, they put a bunch more of it in there for a second blast.”

. . .

After the second detonation, [Bryers] noticed that a 7,500-pound boulder had crashed through the top of the Ryder truck, landing on a massive coil of detonating cord.

“I wish that I would have got a picture of it, but I didn’t have my camera,” he said. “That rock was just sitting there on top of all the explosives.”

. . .

The fire got concerningly close. Bryers was laying out a line of pipe from Duck Creek to the Fir Ridge Cemetery north of town when the fire caught up to him.

“Me and another fella stripped naked and jumped into the deep part of Duck Creek,” he said. “We wanted to come out and dry off, but there were a bunch of surprised Idaho farm boys watching from the bank.”

. . .

The crater blasted into the Madison River is long gone, slowly filling with sediment until it disappeared completely a few years after the fires.

However, Bryers said the crater was a fishing hotspot until it was filled in.

“Trout liked to find a nice, deep, slow spot in the river, so I told my fly fishing friends about the crater,” he said. “They caught some big fish out there.”

There's more at the link.

It's a great story of ordinary folks working together to save a vital part of America's natural history.  It must have been utterly exhausting for all concerned, but they got the job done.  Highly recommended reading.

Peter

Memes that made me laugh 276

 

Gathered from around the Internet over the past week.  Click any image for a larger view.

Sunday morning music

 

Something rather different this morning...

Saga Lore AI is an artist (?) who creates videos themed to well-known films and TV shows, but with original music and AI-generated artwork.  He very skillfully adapts well-known actors' faces to his artificial AI scenario, instantly recognizable if you know the original film or show, but blending into his new imaginary reality.

This morning I've chosen four of his videos based on Peter Jackson's "Lord of the Rings" trilogy of movies.  The first is a hard rock re-imagining set in the Vietnam War era.  Language alert:  there are a few naughty words here and there.

The next three adapt reggae music and "philosophy" (?) to the three volumes of the Lord of the Rings trilogy.  It's certainly a very different approach!

I enjoyed the imagination that went into them.  I hope you did, too.  You'll find plenty more of Saga Lore AI's music on his YouTube channel.

Peter

The Minneapolis shooter's insane "mandate"

 

Fellow blogger Big Country Expat has taken the time and trouble to photograph every page of the Minneapolis church shooter's ramblings (I refuse to use his name - let him be forgotten!), and has published them on his blog, along with a translation of the weird mixture of English and pseudo-Russian, Latin and Cyrillic script in which they're written.  Click here to go to his place and take a look.

I think he's done us a public service by putting this stuff out there.  I suggest each of us bookmark his post, and if possible save a copy to our own computers, because sure as hell the progressive left is going to try to deep-six the "manifesto" in order to "protect" the trans community.  We need to remember, and be aware every day, that the proportion of mass shootings and other such crimes committed by trans people is out of all proportion to their actual numbers.  It's getting to the point where I think we might start classifying all trans people as at least potential criminals of this sort, purely to protect ourselves against the larger-than-usual proportion of mass murderers coming out of their number.

Also, it's long gone time to improve our school security.  I suggest training and arming teachers, since they're the people on the spot if trouble starts.  I know this latest shooting occurred at a school church service - but that can be catered for, too.  I knew more than a few priests in Africa who routinely carried a gun beneath their vestments as they celebrated Mass, and for good reason.  They lived in parts of the continent where inter-religious violence was the rule rather than the exception, and they saw it as part of their duty to protect "the flock of God which is their charge".  I'm sure their successors are continuing the same policy today.  More power to them!

Peter

The deeper we dig, the worse the smell becomes

 

In the relatively short time that President Trump has been in office, investigations have uncovered misallocation of funds, corruption, bribery and malfeasance to an astonishing extent.  I'm willing to bet most go back to the Obama administration, when covert corruption of the system of government became entrenched.

Two articles caught my eye over the past couple of days.  The first refers to the Palisades fire in California last year.

Millions of dollars raised to help victims of the 2025 California wildfires have ended up in the coffers of unrelated nonprofits pushing a variety of progressive causes, a Washington Free Beacon review found. Some of the groups that have received funds explicitly exclude white people from their services, while others advertise programs for illegal aliens.

FireAid, a celebrity-studded fundraising organization that raked in about $100 million for wildfire relief efforts, has distributed money to more than 160 California nonprofits. Its flagship event on Jan. 30, produced by the Annenberg Foundation, featured performers like Billie Eilish, Lady Gaga, Dr. Dre, Stevie Wonder, and Sting, among others.

There's more at the link.

What appears conspicuous by its absence is the complete lack of support from FireAid to actual victims of the disaster.  As far as we know, left-wing progressive liberal organizations benefited, but not a single property owner was compensated for losses suffered in the fire.  I wonder if those who donated to FireAid knew that - and how they feel about it now?  If it were me, I'd be demanding a refund.

The second article is from Jeff Childers, who notes that President Trump appears to be uncovering all sorts of interesting links between the Soros Foundation and other major progressive donors, coupled to the massive spread of non-governmental organizations (NGO's) who receive such donations and use them without having to account for what they're doing with the money.

Let’s connect some dots! First, yesterday President Trump randomly and quite colorfully posted about how the Soros family should be investigated for mob-like racketeering. Fair enough. No arguments here. But … why now?

. . .

The headlined but unnamed “firm” is mega-NGO Arabella Advisors, which the Times admitted “manages several ‘dark money’ funds that support Democrats and the progressive movement.” By “several dark money funds,” it meant hundreds.

. . .

Now let’s add the USAID connection. Over the last decade, Arabella Advisors and its woketopus of blandly named subsidiaries minted a cottage industry for USAID careerists, hiring them in the septic-tanker loads. And Arabella’s biggest donors, including the aforementioned Gates Foundation, were also —not coincidentally— some of the nation’s largest USAID grant recipients.

Now we can see the entire, obscene length and girth of the woke gravy train. Our own money flowed from USAID to the Gates Foundation and other big platforms, then to Arabella, and then to leftwing NGOs, Democrat politicians, and progressive activist groups. It was a kind of perpetual-motion donor machine where accountability disappeared in a puff of sulphuric smoke at each handoff.

You must admit it was a devilishly brilliant scheme, tricking us into paying for our own destruction.

. . .

Trump’s RICO drumbeat against Soros hints that this whole philanthropy-politics pipeline is about to be treated as what it is: a criminal enterprise. Trump’s post about Soros and RICO and the Gates–Arabella unraveling link up at the same networked-funding “philanthropic” ecosystem.

However it happens, if that USAID → Mega-platforms (like Gates) → Arabella → progressive activist pipeline is finally switched off, the political effect would be massive. Arabella’s fiscal-sponsor funds have quietly underwritten much of the left’s operational backbone: voter registration groups, climate activism, racial justice nonprofits, education campaigns, and ballot initiatives. Cutting the pipeline means many of those groups would lose dependable, pooled, and largely anonymous funding streams. They’ll struggle to sustain staff, payroll, and field operations at the current scale.

Again, more at the link.

Remember, an organized financial network of behind-the-scenes support for progressive left-wing politics doesn't get set up overnight.  This has been constructed over years, possibly even decades.  As I mentioned earlier, I suspect it swung into high gear when President Obama was elected.  Indeed, this left-wing political machine might have made it a priority to elect a president whom they could control, and who could be "managed" to enable such behind-the-scenes chicanery.

I have no objection at all to any shade of political opinion funding its operations in an open, transparent, honest way.  There should be accountability, of course, but openness is a great sanitizer.  It's when things are done in secret, with money shuffled from group to group and account to account so often that it becomes untraceable, that things get murky.  From what Mr. Childers has said, it looks as if the Soros-Arabella axis is as murky as they come.  One hopes we'll get to the bottom of it in due course.

I'm particularly going to watch for indications of how many US taxpayer dollars were diverted to progressive left-wing partisan politics via USAID and NGO's.  I won't be surprised to learn it was in the hundreds of billions of dollars per year.  If so, one hopes the perpetrators will be hunted down and prosecuted for their misdeeds - just as those raising funds under false pretenses, no matter how carefully worded in evasive, weaselly terms, should also be held accountable.

Peter

Let's give Cracker Barrel some food for thought...

 

... courtesy of Stephan Pastis.  Click the image to be taken to a larger version at the "Pearls Before Swine" Web page.

Think that's toxically masculine enough for their new "woke" approach to reject?

Peter

So much for the "Katrina Declaration"

 

I note with disgust that a large number of employees of the Federal Emergency Management Agency (FEMA) have complained that "the Trump administration’s sweeping overhaul is gutting the disaster relief agency’s authority and capabilities, undoing two decades of progress since the failures of Hurricane Katrina".

Titled “Katrina Declaration,” the letter accuses President Donald Trump and Homeland Security Secretary Kristi Noem, whose department oversees FEMA, of eroding the agency’s response capabilities and appointing unqualified leadership. The group calls for FEMA to be shielded from political interference and for its workforce to be protected from politically motivated firings.

The warning comes as the nation marks 20 years since Katrina devastated the Gulf Coast, killing nearly 1,400 people, according to the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA.) The botched FEMA effort exposed fatal flaws in the federal emergency response system – failures that led Congress to pass sweeping reforms, including the Post-Katrina Emergency Management Reform Act, which strengthened FEMA’s independence and set higher standards for its leaders.

Now, the letter argues, those reforms are being unraveled, as the Trump administration moves to either abolish or drastically shrink FEMA’s role.

There's more at the link.

I remember FEMA and Katrina very well indeed, because I was part of the independent efforts to bring relief to New Orleans after that hurricane, and saw the official cock-ups at first hand.  I wrote about them at length at the time and afterwards.  Go read about them for yourself, if you haven't already read that earlier article.  It's eye-opening.  Let's just say that my respect for FEMA, the American Red Cross and a number of other big-name emergency management and disaster relief organizations was severely undermined.

As for "reforms" implemented after Katrina, why don't we ask the citizens of North Carolina how they feel about the agency after Hurricane Helene went through there last year?  The initial relief efforts were a shambles, and didn't improve until the Trump administration took office in January this year.  There were - and still are - persistent allegations that the Biden administration deliberately slow-walked aid to the area because it was largely conservative in its politics, and had not supported the Democratic Party and the Biden administration in the past.  FEMA was pilloried by many of the locals for its initial failure to act, and - when it did act - for ignoring the expertise of local agencies and taking over in a heavy-handed, inefficient, bureaucratic manner.  There were repeated reports of supplies sent in by independent agencies being confiscated by FEMA without so much as a "by your leave", and a number of rescuers reported that they were ordered out of the area on pain of arrest if they returned.

I think FEMA as presently constituted is nothing more than a collection of bureaucrats throwing their weight around in an attempt to justify their existence.  I think we'd be far better served if each State set up its own FEMA equivalent, using people who know the local area and population and are thus better positioned to help without delay in time of need.  The federal FEMA could then be used as a conduit to get supplies and equipment to the state(s) when and where it's needed, and hand it over to the local FEMA to put it to work.  The military could also establish permanent, working relationships with the State-level FEMA's to prearrange things like helicopter support, evacuations, etc.

Meanwhile, based on my own extensive (albeit two-decade-old) experience with FEMA, I consider this "Katrina Declaration" to be not worth the paper it's printed on.

Peter

The artificial intelligence "surge" - hype or reality? Good idea, or terrible?

 

Earlier this month I published an article titled "A sobering, short-term warning about artificial intelligence and white-collar jobs".  In it, I noted:

A professional is now expected to use AI to augment or supplement his training and experience, conducting searches, market research, etc. in the background while he applies himself to current problems in the foreground.  It's reported that productivity improvements of up to several hundred per cent are being claimed - and those who aren't "getting with the program", learning to use AI to work smarter, are already finding their careers being sidelined or cut short.

In the past week, I've run into several more articles raising the specter of AI domination of different sectors of the economy, and what this might mean for workers.  Examples:

• "Why More Farmers Are Turning To AI Machines":  As the capabilities of robotics evolve, many jobs that once required human hands are being delegated to machines. Some artificial intelligence (AI) developers working on integrating this technology into America’s farms say early data support the possibility of a major farm labor force reduction.
• "Elon Musk Backs Universal High Income Fearing AI Will Take Every Job":  Instead of living aimless lives without purpose, Musk believes that there’s another option: “Long term … any job that somebody does will be optional. … If you want to do a job as kinda like a hobby, you can do a job, but otherwise, the AI and robots will provide any goods and services that you want.”
• "YouTube secretly used AI to edit people's videos. The results could bend reality":  YouTube made AI enhancements to videos without telling users or asking permission. As AI quietly mediates our world, what happens to our shared connection with real life?  (See also my earlier article titled "What happens to trust when anything can be faked?")
• "Medicine goes AI":  Medicine is precisely the sort of bounded field with measurable outcomes and complex inputs where human cognition is simply not that good and where AI can excel.  And it’s coming.  Fast ... In medicine the question is rapidly shifting from "Why should we risk AI hallucination?" to "Why should we risk it from humans?"

I daresay a lot of the hype is driven by technologically enthusiastic journalists, who are trying to position themselves as authority figures among the commentariat.  The reality on the ground may not be as advanced or as useful as they posit, but artificial intelligence (and those who develop and sell it) seems to be trying to follow the self-hypnotic mantra of Émile Coué:  "Every day, in every way, I'm getting better and better".

I'm curious.  How many of us, dear readers, are actually experiencing a positive impact of artificial intelligence in our day-to-day lives?  How many of us can say that we've encountered a "smart" system, or appliance, or interaction, that has shown AI to be superior to dealing with a human being?  When it comes to telephone answering systems, for example, I'm finding it more and more difficult to call a company for support and get the assistance I need, because the AI "front-end" to their calling tree actively tries to prevent me speaking to a person, and instead tries to force me to interact with its limited and all-too-often inadequate menu.  So far, I'd say my interactions with AI have been more negative than positive.

How about you, readers?

Peter

Allergies, and what works for you

 

This summer has been a bad one for those suffering from allergies in northern Texas.  We've had much more rain and humidity than normal, so the plants have flourished and given off pollen, seeds and what have you much more prolifically than usual.  My wife's "normal" allergy to some grasses got so bad she couldn't even cut the yard, or be out there while someone else did it.  I've had a really nasty post-nasal drip that got bad enough to affect my lungs, coughing up chunks.  It hasn't been fun.

We've tried almost everything.  My wife gets a weekly anti-allergy shot, and uses Allegra-D and other medications to try to keep things under control.  I've tried almost everything, from Allegra-D and Claritin-D through the gamut of lesser antihistamines.  I've finally settled on Fluticasone nasal spray as the most effective solution I can find to cut down my post-nasal drip;  it's not a complete answer, but it makes it controllable.

The interesting thing is that almost everyone seems to have their own favorite anti-allergy medication, but few agree on the same one.  Among our friends, there are almost as many preferences as there are brands on the supermarket shelf.  That being the case, I thought I'd ask you, dear readers, for your favorite anti-allergy medication.  What works for you?  What doesn't work, in your experience?  Perhaps, if enough of us comment, we can figure out whether there's something that works for most people, or whether it's still going to be a guessing game for each individual to work out for themselves.

Over to you!

Peter