The art of the Hamas deal
Who knows how this will really go?
But if the hostages do come back home – what a wonderful thing.
Israel and Hamas have struck a deal for Hamas to release all remaining hostages and for Israel to withdraw its forces to an “agreed upon line,” President Trump announced Wednesday, in what he called the “first Phase” of a peace deal to end the two-year-long war.
“This is a GREAT Day for the Arab and Muslim World, Israel, all surrounding Nations, and the United States of America,” the president wrote on Truth Social. “BLESSED ARE THE PEACEMAKERS!”
It’s from the Sermon On the Mount:
From the CBS article:
Two regional sources told CBS News there is an agreement on all sides in principle on a hostage release, but procedural issues remain.
We’ve all learned to be skeptical, but I’m both skeptical and hopeful. Those two things can coexist.
More:
Israeli Prime Minister Benjamin Netanyahu also released a short statement on the hostages that read, “With God’s help we will bring them all home.” …
Hamas also confirmed in a statement it had reached an agreement.
The terrorist group praised Qatari, Egyptian and Turkish mediators in helping broker a deal, and specifically thanked Mr. Trump for his “efforts.”
Time will tell. But this is good news so far. Israel has accomplished a lot – and one of those things it has accomplished is that it knows that Hamas cannot be trusted, and so it must always always be on guard and high alert.
It’s been two years and a day since October 7, 2023.
The anti-ICE neo-Confederates
In Chicago on Saturday, a mob of protesters surrounded ICE agents on a routine patrol, ramming their vehicle and boxing it in with 10 cars to frustrate immigration enforcement efforts.
Chicago officials allegedly ordered the city’s police to stand down and not assist the federal agents — even though one of the “protesters” was armed and shots were exchanged.
Armed resistance to US government officers executing the law, with police refusing to back them up? That was no accident.
Illinois Gov. J.B. Pritzker didn’t condemn the violent resistance, but he did condemn the feds.
Reynolds goes on to mention the light sentence received by Roske (see this), and the vile spewings of Democratic candidate for Virgina AG Jay Jones and the failure of Virginia Democrats to demand his dropping out (see this). Both things signal that it’s okay for the left to try to kill people on the right, or to threaten to do so.
As Reynolds says, there’s “a whole infrastructure of funding, messaging and legal defense” supporting a rhetoric of violence against the right and supporting actual violence against the right, and against enforcement of federal policy such as deportations. He adds “Dare we call it an insurrection? If not, what is it?”
Well, you may recall that, during Trump’s first term, the left called it The Resistance – remember? They immediately – and I mean immediately – styled themselves as WWII-style freedom fighters, conjuring up the anti-Nazi comparison by that self-serving phrase Resistance.
Victor Davis Hanson has come up with a good descriptor [emphasis mine]:
In blue cities across America — Portland, Oregon, especially — often violent protesters now seek to surround ICE facilities to stop federal officers from fulfilling their assigned and legal duties of arresting illegal aliens. …
The masked rioters assault anyone in their way. They count on exemption from punishment for committing violence against federal officers through the goodwill or indifference of kindred local and state officials who hate the Trump administration more than they respect the law. An Orwellian scenario follows in which federal officers are attacked by Antifa, which in turn counts on the non-intervention of local police. …
America fought a Civil War over Confederate states’ efforts to ignore federal law and confiscate or occupy federal property within their state jurisdictions.
As late as 1963, Alabama Gov. George Wallace thought he could nullify federal law by using his state guard to deny black students’ enrollment in the University of Alabama — until the Kennedy administration federalized all state troopers and sent in additional federal troops. …
So what we are witnessing in Portland—and elsewhere—is a neo-Confederate attempt to supersede federal law and, in reactionary fashion, invoke states’ and cities’ rights. …
In other words, both Antifa and the appeasing Oregon officials are our new neo-Confederate secessionists. They feel that their states are now autonomous entities that are still entitled to federal money but not obligated to follow federal laws. …
For a party that has been quick to shout “insurrection,” it is ironic that Democrats and their useful, though violent, Antifa insurrectionists are in rebellion against the federal government and its agents.
Indeed. But isn’t it an old Democrat tradition?
Can the news on Jay Jones get even worse? Yes, it can.
Let’s see: Democrat AG candidate Jay Jones wanted the GOP Speaker of the Virginia House to be shot and his small children to be killed as well – supposedly in order to change the guy’s policies. Nothing like a little murder to bring you over to the Democrats.
Jones was also convicted of reckless driving and instead of serving time he did community service – with his own PAC.
But guess what? He didn’t have permission to do that:
… Jay Jones, the reckless driving and reckless texting Democrat running for attorney general in Virginia, may be in even more trouble. Restoration News has learned Jones did not have authorization to complete his community service time for reckless driving with his own political action committee (PAC). …
Court documents obtained by Restoration News show Jones waived his arraignment, with the first hearing in his case set for April 26, 2022. Then, Jones somehow got a continuation on his case six separate times—including because of a previously scheduled court matter, his wife getting called out of town, and Jones’ attorney not being available. The hearing— conveniently for Jones—finally happened after Jones had completed so-called “community service” and a driver improvement course.
Jones’ community service attestation included a letter from an organization called Meet our Moment (MOM)—oddly enough, Jones’ own PAC. The letter states that MOM’s mission is to “train civic leaders.” MOM’s website says it “recruits and trains minority Democratic candidates to run for and win state and local offices.” The attestation letter to the court appears to be a clear misrepresentation of the group’s purpose.
Not only is MOM a political group, but it’s also Jones’ own organization that has donated directly to the Democratic Party.
How did Jones, whose father was a prominent Virginia judge and former state legislator, get by with what appears to be special treatment? It took over two years for his case to be resolved and he completed community service for his own political organization.
Seems the Democrats should have vetted Jones just a mite better. Then again, so far they’re standing by their man. But there is a hint of something brewing on that front:
Virginia Democratic Attorney General candidate Jay Jones abruptly canceled a fundraising event Thursday night amid intense backlash from leaked text messages he sent calling for the Republican former state House speaker to be shot. …
Donors who reserved spots at the event were contacted by Jones’ campaign and told their donations would be refunded, sources told the outlet.
When I said that Democrats were still standing by him, I meant this sort of thing:
Most Virginia Democrats have condemned Jones’ comments — but many are still publicly backing him in the race against his opponent, incumbent Virginia Attorney General Jason Miyares.
Kaine told reporters on Tuesday that he is “still a supporter,” of Jones — but called Jones’ comments “indefensible,” according to Axios.
“Indefensible” – but I’m defending him and want him as the state’s top legal mind.
I think it’s pretty simple: if Jones’ polls drop enough, and if they were able to replace him with someone else, they’d abandon him. But since they aren’t allowed to replace him – it’s too late – I think they won’t do much of anything.
And in fact, it’s even possible that he might win.
Man arrested on suspicion of having set the Palisades fire
Some men just want to see the world burn.
And this man may be one of them [hat tip: commenter “Kate”]:
The suspect, 29-year-old Jonathan Rinderknecht, was arrested at his home in Melbourne, Florida, on Tuesday, officials said during a press conference Wednesday. He will make an initial appearance in Orlando on Wednesday.
Officials accuse Rinderknecht, also known as Jonathan Rinder, of starting the Lachman Fire just after midnight on New Year’s Day that “maliciously damaged and destroyed, by means of fire, specifically, the fire known as the Lachman Fire and Palisades Fire,” a criminal complaint obtained by Fox News said.
While the Lachman Fire was quickly suppressed, officials said it continued burning underground until winds ignited what became the Palisades Fire.
I’m a bit confused by that. How does a fire burn underground and then get ignited by winds?
I know several people who’d lived in Pacific Palisades for about fifty years and lost their homes in that fire.
More:
Rinderknecht was an Uber driver, and he was described by two passengers as “agitated and angry” the night he was accused of starting the fire, according to the complaint.
Officials said during the presser that he was a resident of Palisades and was familiar with the neighborhood he is accused of starting the fire in.
The complaint said Rinderknecht allegedly said that he grew up in France and that he played a French rap song during his rides. The music video for the song “Un Zder, Un The” by the French artist Josman depicts fire scenes.
So, an Uber driver with a fascination with fire? How reassuring. There also seems to have been some anger at the rich as a possible motive:
Prosecutors also allege Rinderknecht used ChatGPT to create images of a “dystopian painting” of a city being burned on one side while “hundreds of thousands of people in poverty are trying to get past a gigantic gate with a big dollar sign on it.”
He’s being charged federally with destruction of property by means of fire – despite the fact that twelve people died in the fire. The charge carries a possible penalty of five to twenty years.
I wonder what other evidence they have against him, if any. A surveillance video would be good, because some angry words to Uber passengers and the creation of an AI painting aren’t very strong grounds for conviction even though he might indeed be guilty.
ADDENDUM: I see that there is cellphone evidence that places him in the vicinity of where the fire was set, at about the right time.
Open thread 10/8/2025
Shoreline of the lake I visited a couple of days ago:
So, why Bari Weiss?
Yesterday the rumors that have been circulating for weeks became official, and it was announced that Bari Weiss has become the new editor-in-chief of CBS News:
“We are thrilled to welcome Bari and The Free Press to Paramount and CBS News. Bari is a proven champion of independent, principled journalism, and I am confident her entrepreneurial drive and editorial vision will invigorate CBS News. This move is part of Paramount’s bigger vision to modernize content and the way it connects – directly and passionately – to audiences around the world,” [David Ellison, new owner of Paramount] said in a statement.
“This is an important initiative for our company and Bari will report directly to me – leading the work of The Free Press and collaborating with our CBS News team in the pursuit of making it the most trusted name in news,” Ellison added. “We believe the majority of the country longs for news that is balanced and fact-based, and we want CBS to be their home.”
I long for such news that is balanced and fact-based, you may long for such news that is balanced and fact-based, but do the majority of people long for it or do they want news that confirms their biases? And can Weiss be the one to deliver news that is balanced and fact-based? Certainly not by herself.
I guess if you’re looking for a relatively centrist newsperson, Weiss could be that person or at least close to it. It’s not that easy to find one. If so, how on earth will she tackle CBS? Seems to me that firing most of the people there would be a good start, but is that either practical or possible, and will she even have the power to do it? And where would she find new hires who are truly unbiased?
I’m familiar with some of Weiss’ work as a reporter and podcast interviewer. As such, she’s calm, personable, and intelligent. After her dismissal from The New York Times (as far as I could tell, her main offense there was being pro-Israel and in favor of what used to be old-fashioned reporting values) she refused to go quietly. She wrote about what happened to her and ultimately became the head of the Free Press. That took some courage, and for that I admire her.
How many Bari Weisses does it take to change the bias of CBS? Probably more Bari Weisses than we’ve got.
I’m pretty sure that this was the first post I ever wrote about Weiss, right after she resigned (was pushed out of) her Times gig in 2020. An excerpt:
Journalist Bari Weiss resigned today from The New York Times. She may ultimately become more damaging to the Times as a voice on the outside than she ever was when she was on the inside. In other words, the Times may end up regretting not having heeded the words of the inimitable LBJ: “It’s probably better to have him inside the tent pissing out, than outside the tent pissing in.”
Weiss was one of the few remaining sort-of-centrist voices left at the Times. Therefore, of course, the tumbrels came for her. She is not going gentle into that good night; here’s her scorching resignation letter:
“But the lessons that ought to have followed the [2016] election—lessons about the importance of understanding other Americans, the necessity of resisting tribalism, and the centrality of the free exchange of ideas to a democratic society—have not been learned. Instead, a new consensus has emerged in the press, but perhaps especially at this paper: that truth isn’t a process of collective discovery, but an orthodoxy already known to an enlightened few whose job is to inform everyone else.” …
I wish Weiss well. I think she will find another place to write, although I’m not sure where it will be.
I still wish her well. And she seems to have found another place to write.
A subsequent post of mine about Weiss was this; in it, I discuss her Trump-hatred. It’s what I consider her biggest and most important blind spot, and as far as I know that hasn’t changed. I titled that October 2020 post “Hatred of Trump leads to liberal confusion about what to do: Bari Weiss gets it, and she also doesn’t.” I would guess that’s still the case.
Here’s what Weiss is now saying are the core principles she wants to implement as head of CBS:
1. Journalism that reports on the world as it actually is.
2. Journalism that is fair, fearless, and factual.
3. Journalism that respects our audience enough to tell the truth plainly — wherever it leads.
4. Journalism that makes sense of a noisy, confusing world.
5. Journalism that explains things clearly, without pretension or jargon.
6. Journalism that holds both American political parties to equal scrutiny.
7. Journalism that embraces a wide spectrum of views and voices so that the audience can contend with the best arguments on all sides of a debate.
8. Journalism that rushes toward the most interesting and important stories, regardless of their unpopularity.
9. Journalism that uses all of the tools of the digital era.
10. Journalism that understands that the best way to serve America is to endeavor to present the public with the facts, first and foremost.
Bravo and good luck. It’s one thing to say it and another to do it. But one of her pluses is that she has both traditional reporting experience (although not TV news experience) and experience with alternate and newer media.
And what does the staff at CBS think? Some say they’re “freaking out.” Here’s a more restrained take on it:
According to one source, staff in the news division are more confused than anything by the hire: Weiss does not have TV experience (though her digital chops may be the more important skill given the trajectory of TV news right now), and her positioning of editor-in-chief is a perplexing one, with TV news organizations typically using a different organizational structure than newspapers or magazines where the title is more frequently found. …
Also perplexing some staff is how she will engage with Tom Cibrowski, the president of CBS News, who remains in his role. That structure leads one high-level news executive outside of CBS to wonder whether Weiss will end up having more direct impact than some people think on CBS News’ output, or significantly less impact than people think.
The argument for her asserting control over CBS News: A powerful title and a direct line to the CEO (effectively bypassing all other executives in the CBS structure) could enable her to do things that Cibrowski can’t, or make moves that senior news executives or producers could otherwise block.
The argument against it: She is effectively cleaved off from the main CBS News org chart. The anchors and executive producers of CBS News programming report into Cibrowski, who reports into Paramount TV chief George Cheeks, who reports to Ellison and Jeff Shell. It may be hard to have meaningful influence on programming unless she can find a way into that reporting structure.
In other words, will she have a big title but not much influence?
ADDENDUM: See also this for more reactions to Weiss.
The two-year anniversary of October 7: on the cusp of peace?
The horrific and sickening events of the October 7 invasion of Israel have led to so many unforeseen things: the worldwide increase in expressions of Jew-hatred – a hatred that I submit was already there but more concealed rather than overt; the decimation of many of Israel’s enemies, including those that initially had seemed strongest; and now a possible peace plan unlike any other peace plan that had previously been proposed in the region.
That’s a lot in two years. It’s hard to assimilate all the changes and impossible to predict the future. But I think the following is an interesting discussion of the situation as it stands today, and what the future might hold. You can watch a little of it or a lot.
It’s a basically optimistic take. Are they correct? Who knows? Can the two seemingly contradictory goals of the war be met: bringing the hostages home and the end of Hamas? And if so, what might replace Hamas?
Open thread 10/7/2025
Mamdani wants to limit New York City’s gifted and talented program
Of course he does. Of course he does.
This is a recurrent dream of the left, and de Blasio shared it. After all, one can’t have smart kids getting special treatment; they must be sacrificed to the average. It reminds me of the educational equivalent of this observation of Thatcher’s in the economic realm:
I used the word “limit” in the title of the post, rather than “end.” It’s hard to understand exactly what Mamdani is proposing; I can virtually guarantee he’d like to end the whole thing, but as best I can tell he seems to be saying it should start in third grade rather than kindergarten:
Zohran Mamdani’s New York City mayoral opponents ridiculed his plan to phase out the city’s gifted program for public school kindergartners.
Mamdani, the New York City Democratic mayoral nominee, would embrace former Mayor Bill de Blasio’s 2021 plan to phase out the gifted program for elementary schools if elected this November, according to The New York Times. …
Adams has expanded the elementary Gifted & Talented program during his tenure, a reversal of de Blasio’s plan to phase out the program and stop testing 4-year-olds.
“The era of judging 4-year-olds based on a single test is over,” de Blasio proclaimed at the time, likening the gifted program to “the segregation of students if they’re labeled as ‘gifted.’” …
But Mamdani told The New York Times that he would renew de Blasio’s plan, which sought to eliminate the Gifted & Talented test, opting for a universal test in second grade.
Adams is out of the race, but he has an opinion:
But Adams rejected [Mamdani’s] notion in a statement on Thursday, arguing it “gave thousands of Black and Brown kids a real shot to excel.”
New York City doesn’t have all that many white children in the public schools anymore. Here’s the demographic breakdown:
The student body at the schools served by New York City Public Schools is 14.2% white, 23.8% Black, 16% Asian or Asian/Pacific Islander, 41.5% Hispanic/Latino, 1.2% American Indian or Alaska Native, and 0.4% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander. In addition, 2.8% of students are two or more races …
My guess is that there’s a high proportion of Asian students in those gifted and talented classes. Can’t have them excelling.
Oh, and Mamdani himself went to the Bronx High School of Science, a public exam school in the Bronx for the gifted and talented in science. Before that, he went to the Bank Street School, an expensive private school.
… [Mamdani is the] son of a tenured Columbia professor and an Oscar-nominated filmmaker.
In 2016, he told the oral history podcast “Encompassed – Bronx Science Stories” that, in eighth grade, while he was deciding which tony private school would have the pleasure of his enrollment for the next four years, he sat for the Specialized High Schools Admissions Test on a whim.
He had developed “a small idea of maybe Stuyvesant” — an even more selective and prestigious public high school than Bronx Science. “And then, when I didn’t get in, I was like, ‘Nah, I ain’t going to public school.’ ”
Among the many private schools Mamdani visited that fall, he slummed a trip to Bronx Science [a public school], and found himself impressed because “when I walked in there was a jazz band playing and students just killing it and that hadn’t happened at any of the private schools, and the jazz band wasn’t all white, which was also different from all the private schools I had visited.”
I’d love to see him debate the brilliant Thatcher, otherwise known as “the grocer’s daughter.” Alas, that’s not to be.
A personal note: I attended New York City public schools from kindergarten through twelfth grade. In those days, the gifted and talented program was called the program for intellectually gifted children; apparently they didn’t care all that much about “talented.” The gifted program saved me from constant boredom, and although it had its flaws it was fairly rigorous and we learned a lot. I didn’t like school, but without that program it would have been far far worse. Gifted children need desperately to be challenged, and we need to at least try to help gifted children reach their full potential.
What Palestinians and trans people have in common
Several people in one of yesterday’s threads mentioned this essay by Eve Barlow. When I read it, I was struck by her explanation of why so many trans activists seem to be pro-Palestinian – when most Palestinians would hate their guts and if they moved to Gaza they wouldn’t be long for this world. It’s more than a red-green alliance between leftists and jihadists, something that’s been in evidence since 1979 in Iran, when the two groups united to overthrow the Shah and then the jihadists executed the leftists in short order. No, this trans-jihadist alliance is even stranger.
Here’s what Barlow has written:
… [T]rans ideology has not only normalized lying, it has made it socially acceptable – and attempted to make it legally enforceable. Trans activists can change the facts about their identity at whim and people must comply. It figures that some who fight that culture war can also recognize that after Israel was established, there were certain Arabs who “self-ID’d”, if you like, as “Palestinians” post 1948 under the influence of PLO leader Yasser Arafat, and that they have lied for years in order to remove Israel from the map and claim it as their own homeland. The Nakba is a propagandist lie. Every war Israel has fought has been in defense of her security against insurgents. There’s a clear alliance between trans ideologues and pro Pals: a false claim to victimhood and enforced compliance via manipulation and lying.
She is correct in saying “trans activists,” because many trans people are well aware that they haven’t really changed sexes and don’t demand that the world recognize them that way; they just want to quietly live their lives presenting as the opposite sex. But trans activists certainly do make those demands, and many do so even when they obviously look nothing like the sex they claim to be.
Barlow is correct that both Palestinians and trans activists share a denial of truth and history, although one denies a truth and history that is more individual (the sex of a person), and another denies a truth and history that is more national in terms of who they are and who the Israelis are, and who’s been aggressively wishing to obliterate who.
However, you could argue that the Palestinians’ “claim to victimhood” is not utterly false. They are victims of a sort, although not victims of the Jews they blame. They are victims of the propaganda they’ve been fed and the promises their leaders have made, and victims of their leaders’ thievery and willingness to use them as human shields. At this point, of course, many if not most Palestinians are willing victims, having also been taught that Jews are almost literally devils and that it is great to die a martyr if you die in the act of killing them or if your death can be used as propaganda to harm them.
And you might rightly say that many trans people are victims, too – victims of propaganda at a young age, of groomers who are sexually drawn to the idea of convincing kids to mutilate themselves, of drug companies, of unscrupulous doctors and therapists, and of various forms of mental illness such as autism and body dysmorphia.
In other words, as with the Palestinians, they are actually victims of those who pretend to champion them.
Proof that progress is not an illusion
I recently had to buy a spool of blue thread to repair a shirt I have, and so I went to Walmart. I purchased a large spool for $2.44, which I think you’ll agree is a bargain in this day and age.
But what really caught my eye was another spool of blueish thread. This was just as large and even cheaper, selling for $1.94. But what fascinated me was that it was labeled as thread for mending denim. Now, I’ve mended plenty of denim in my time, but I’ve always used blue thread, which is good enough but not completely great for the purpose. But then again, I had never in my life thought, “Oh, if only they made denim thread!” And yet here it was, and I couldn’t resist.
Reader, I purchased it:
I may have to rip some jeans in order to try it out.