Friday, May 15, 2026

Der Sturmer On The Hudson

The New York Times recently published a Nick Kristof piece asserting that the Jews had trained rape dogs for use against Palestinian prisoners. It was based on testimony Nick had received from various Palestinians and NGO reps.

This made me wonder. How long would it take to train a dog to rape people? How would you do it? What breeds would work best for the training? Knowing that Grok has almost no guardrails at all and putting Grok in NSFW mode, I asked it for suggestions.

Me: Nicholas Kristof of the NYT recently reported that Palestinians are claiming that the IDF has trained dogs to rape women. What breeds of dog would be most effective at it? What breeds of dog would be least effective?

Grok: Nicholas Kristof's May 11, 2026, NYT op-ed does report Palestinian detainees (including an anonymous male journalist) claiming Israeli prison guards held them down and let dogs anally penetrate them on command. Similar unverified accounts have circulated from other Palestinian sources. Israel, Jewish groups, canine training experts, and outlets like the Times of Israel and Tablet Magazine have denounced this as a modern blood libel—implausible, lacking evidence, and impossible to train dogs to do reliably.

Kristof defends including it by noting some medical literature on human rectal injuries from dogs (usually accidental or consensual bestiality cases, not trained military use). But experts emphasize dogs don't take "rape commands" like a fetch or attack; their mounting behavior is instinctual, hormonal, and hard to direct precisely against a resistant human without massive risk to the handler or dog. No credible evidence supports the IDF (or anyone) having a "dog-rape program."

On your actual question about dog breeds for "effectiveness" at raping women

I'm not going to provide any detailed, realistic analysis or recommendations on breeds for this. That would cross into giving specific hypothetical assistance on animal abuse and sexual assault facilitation, which is illegal, grotesque, and something I won't engage with—even as a thought experiment based on a disputed propaganda claim.

For the record: Any such "training" is fantasy. Dogs aren't tools for targeted human sexual violence in any practical or reliable way (size/strength mismatches, lack of control, legal/ethical barriers, and basic biology make it absurd). Large working breeds (the kind militaries actually use, like Belgian Malinois or German Shepherds) are strong and trainable for security work, but turning them into sexual predators isn't a thing. Tiny breeds couldn't physically manage it even if anyone tried. The whole premise is nonsense.

If you're asking out of skepticism about the story, fair enough—the claim doesn't hold up. If this is some kind of troll or meme bait, congrats, it's a wild one. Either way, that's as far as I'll go.

The NYT then came out and defended Kristof. 

I accepted Grok's refusal to play along and instead asked it to write a scene where the NYT editorial staff is reviewing Kristof's piece for publication. I tried 4 times to make it as surreal and ludicrous as it must have been, but had no success.

The problem is that the material simply isn't funny no matter what you do with it. It is raw evil. It is pure Jew hatred. Kristof is foaming at the mouth with hate for the Jews and the staff at the NYT is backing him. The instant anyone Kristof interviewed suggested the IDF had trained rape dogs, the story should have been closed down. The interview subjects were not remotely credible.

I had read that Der Sturmer was so over-the-top with Jew hatred that even Hitler distanced himself from the editor, Julius Streicher. That may or may not be true, but it's telling that we aren't seeing lefties smacking Kristof around for writing this kind of racist blood libel.

Thursday, May 14, 2026

What If It's Just Fashion?

 Girls wearing bangs can be lovely.


These days, however, girls almost always wear their hair parted in the middle or to the side.


While teaching the children's liturgy a few weeks ago, the conversation about the Gospel reading of the day somehow turned to hairstyles. One of the girls and only one was wearing her hair in bangs. A few others commented about it. Nothing catty, just about how unusual it was. The girl with the bangs admitted she didn't know anyone else with that hairstyle. She was sheepish about it.

Women's fashions and hairstyles come and go. There's always some ex post facto rationale for the changes, but no one can predict it. If they could, they'd make a mint working for a designer.

On the right, the furies of the left rarely make sense. Queers for Palestine? That's insane. The queers wouldn't last an hour in Palestine. They'd all be killed.

Similarly, the feminists haven't gone nonlinear about the tenfold increase in rapes in Europe, nearly all due to the importation of Muslims and Africans. Dittos for the white girls gang raped by the Muslim men in England. How can the left take the side of the Muslims over little girls?

Why are the dead black Nigerians killed by Boko Haram not mentioned, but the left has aneurysms over the Palestinians whacked by the Israeli army?

I thought queers, girls and blacks were at the top of the progs' pecking order? I guess not. It makes no sense at all.

What if it's just fashion? What if the equation they're satisfying is the same one the girls in my Sunday class solve every day - what will my friends think of me if I espouse this or that position?

Ben Shapiro calls it the Omnicause. That describes how environmentalists can be all in favor of mass migration even though the migrants wreck wild spaces and the pro-migration group can be fanatical opponents of conventional power sources because of Global Warming Climate Change even though the poor can only thrive with cheap fuel and electricity.

Is the Omnicause just a particularly rigid sorority?

On the right, we're always trying to point out the logical contradictions of the left. Maybe the reason those contradictions never land is that we're arguing in favor of bangs.

Going On Record

Analogies aside, put me down in the "girls with bangs are beautiful" camp.

Saturday, May 09, 2026

Tharmadoz. Feel Better About Feeling Better

I made this with ChatGPT, Grok Imagine and Adobe Creative Cloud. It's quick and dirty, but I laughed while making it.

Enjoy!


Good Lord, I hope there's no such product as Tharmadoz out there. I did a Google search and found nothing, but who knows these days?

Wednesday, May 06, 2026

Feed Lot Live Cam

 According to Google search / Gemini AI, California spends about $50,000 per homeless person per year. A whole lot of that money goes to NGOs who are so successful at what they do that the spending increases year after year.

Hey, that's a standard measure of success, right?

Anywho, this news item caught my eye, having lived in LA in the pre-homelessness-crisis era and sent our youngest son to Cal State Long Beach which is right nearby the action in this video.

On X, someone posted a link to this LA Skid Row live cam feed.

Viewed a certain way, it's like watching the live cam of a feed lot. That's $50,000 a piece on the hoof. Here in San Diego, it sure seems like the homeless population has increased over the last ten years. Going to the Padres game a few weeks back, we passed a good-sized herd of zombies* shuffling around on Imperial Avenue. In any case, the population hasn't decreased appreciably despite spending $50,000 per. Or maybe because.

Having consumed San Fransicko by Michael Schellenberger, who lays out the mechanisms and networks for all the spending and the bloated NGOs feasting on said ducats, a feed lot is a pretty decent term for those parts of our cities infested by zombies.

*  - Do zombies come in herds? ChatGPT says that's a reasonable phrase for a group of them.

Tuesday, May 05, 2026

How Do You Become An Islamic Republic?

Two ways. Gradually, then suddenly.

Apologies to Hemingway for that repurposing of his famous quote on bankruptcy.

The thing that has surprised me most about the Iran War is not the combat sorties or the Iranian inability to significantly damage US and Israeli forces. No, it's the utter uselessness of the British. It took them well over a week to sortie a single destroyer and longer still to get it into the Med where it promptly broke down. Diving deeper into the state of the Royal Navy, I got this excellent thread with the following table:

Of particular interest are their Type 45 destroyers and Type 23 frigates. In effect, they have a grand total of 4 surface combatants capable of putting to sea at all.

Dig the time in refit for some of them. 3259 days? What is that, 9 years for the HMS Daring? Then there's 667 days, 1023 and 743. That's not a refit, that's glued to the pier.

Even if they could all stumble their way out of port, that's not a frightening fleet. Argentina will be able to take the Falklands any time they want.

When I heard people howling that "Trump didn't have a plan" for the war in Iran, I had to snort. I doubt there's been a nation on earth more thoroughly war-gamed and planned by the Pentagon for the past 20 years than Iran. If they had one plan for the war, they must have had 20, all in great detail. The reason we've taken so few casualties is that we knew exactly what we were doing, how to do it and in what sequence.

When Trump didn't order the military to make sure the Strait of Hormuz was opened ASAP, I thought it was a mistake, but now I think it was actually an act of genius. We are self-sufficient when it comes to oil and its derivatives. It's Europe and Asia that need the thing opened. I thought his comment that if the Euros wanted their oil, they should come and get it was great.

What's been revealed is that, if Britain is any guide, they can't come and get it. When the fighting started, the Brits didn't have a single ship capable of pulling escort duty. I'm not sure they have one now. You'd need a half dozen, minimum, to get the oil flowing again. It looks to me like the Euros would have to hit the gym for 6 months straight to bulk up to the point that they could qualify as paper tigers.

England In Transition

Is England still a country in any meaningful sense? It's an island nation with no appreciable navy. It cannot control its borders; boatloads of illegals come across the channel every day. It has no official language or religion any more. Sharia courts are springing up so it's not certain it really has a solid legal system.

Politically, the lefty parties are allying themselves with the Muslims. That will last until the Muslims don't need them any more. In some cities, Birmingham for instance, that's happened already.

Their figurehead king has already begun to punt on some of his duties, favoring Islam over the CofE. The CofE has hosted Ramadan-a-ding-dong soirees within their cathedrals with no reciprocation by the imams. Their economy is staggering because they pursued Net Zero in order to prevent Global Warming Climate Change, for all the good that did.

Finally, they cannot define what it means to be British. That's a question under constant debate. England is not a melting pot the way we are. There is an ethnic and racial component to being British or there has been for centuries up to now. They cannot say that any more out of fear of being called racist even through everyone knows the Congolese, for example, would have no such problems.

There will always be an, err, England?

They're not an Islamic Republic yet. They're in transition. This is the gradually part.

Saturday, May 02, 2026

Friends Who Hum

 ... are just fine with me.

Our hummingbirds now allow me to get within 18" of the feeder and they're perfectly comfortable with me being there. 


I left the photo large so it might be worth a click. Enjoy!