WOOF! Watchdogs of Our Freedom

Archive for 2022|Yearly archive page

“Are You a Boy, or Are You a Girl?”

In "See you in the funnies" forum on September 14, 2022 at 3:53 pm

In which WOOF’s editor in chief, Old Bugler, expresses his up-to-the-minute-if-frustratingly-excursive views on nothing but 100% guaranteed genuine news, mostly in the annoyingly officious third-person, as befits his station!   

If you are as old, or nearly as old, as your humble editor–and granted, few are–you may recall a rock tune from the mid-sixties by a lesser known combo called The Barbarians. They scored a minor hit querying: “Are you a boy, or are you a girl?” The succeeding line, if memory serves, was,“If you’re not a girl, then you come from Liverpool!” It was funny in 1965 because it lampooned a sizable subset of American society that gloried in blaring the titular interrogative at any passing lad sporting hair past the tips of his ears. If you were so assailed in that era, you may recall that none of the assailing dullards seemed able to conceive any wittier insult, and seemed uniformly convinced that screaming “are you a boy or are you a girl?”constituted the ultimate squelch.

But whether you were a screaming dullard, or the recipient of the dullards’ taunts, you recognized the question was (albeit insultingly) binary. In other words you had only two available responses (or you could resist responding altogether, or you could break the issuer’s jaw)… No one in the Barbarians thought to include any alternatives, nor would it have occurred to recipients of the query to explain they were, in fact, “questioning” or “non-binary.” Nobody would have understood such gobbledygook, whereas nowadays we pretend to.

Then as now, however, with occasional hermaphroditic exceptions, all babies came in two varieties, which is to say “boys” and “girls.” It was easy to tell, because boys had penises and girls had vaginas. In fact, the same holds true nowadays. And, however briefly, babies are assigned one of two genders in the hospital, or yes, even by enlightened midwives, because the issuers of birth certificates are either unwoke, or, more probably, sensible of the insufficient space on birth certificates to accommodate whichever clusters of the 82 (currently available) ‘genders’ may appeal to woke moms and dads, dads and dads, or moms and moms. But yes, your editor has already committed an unpardonable sin–he has just confused gender with sex. Oops!


Have you noticed how important such nice distinctions seem to liberal pundits? They relish imposing them at moments selected to disconcert the naive; usually college students eager to confuse paradox with profundity. These pedagogic slicksters bask in the stir their counter-intuitive assertions provoke:

“Rape,” the woke professor assures his dumbstruck students,”is not about sex!” Similarly, “the Civil War was not about slavery!” And of course–I admit the ‘error’–“Gender is not about sex–” an arguable lexicographic point rendered moot by repeated draggings (no pun intended) through the muck of  contemporary academe.  A few of us recall a day in which college professors contributed their insights to refining usage notes in dictionaries.  More recently America’s educators seem content to loaf about their faculty lounges confecting nonsense terms that inflate their various unhinged lexicons. Stuffing dictionaries (and students) with such evanescent gibberish is a full-blown professorial fad.

Descriptivism villainously distorts the meaning of language [see previous editorial rant] while constructivism appears to legitimate the resultant havoc. But in this case, to lock down the meaning of our terms, let us return to an epoch antecedent to liberal contamination.  Let’s consult Meriam Webster’s 1913 dictionary.  In 1913, Webster insensitively defined gender as “Sex, male or female.” Additionally, it can imply “a classification of nouns, primarily according to sex; and secondarily to some fancied or imputed quality associated with sex.” [Italics added.] The entry seems uncannily prescient.

Webster\s dictionary in its uncannily prescient avatar…

As to sex? Webster’s in 1913 defined it as “Sex, n. 1. The distinguishing peculiarity of male or female in both animals and plants; the physical difference between male and female; the assemblage of properties or qualities by which male is distinguished from female.” Of course, in 1913, nobody knew any better.

“Out there…”

Paula Leech, evidently a girl.

Descriptivists are busy improving these definitions, or rather, deconstructing them into radical insipidity. A representative example is offered by no less an authority than Paula Leech, LMFT, and AASECT-certified sex therapist. Paula writes, “Thankfully, [sic] it’s 2022, and many of the terms surrounding gender are becoming more widely recognized in our society. The language we have around [gender identity] is rapidly expanding to accommodate for [sic] the wide variety of gender identities and expressions out there.” Out there? No wonder Leech believes 2022 is so thankful–it has shaken the stodgy encumbrances of binary neanderthalism and reached the heady apogee of constructive wokeness.

Jackie Golob, MS, writes, “Gender is a term that relates to how we feel about ourselves, the way we choose to express our gender through makeup, dresses, high heels, athletic shorts, sneakers, and more.” (So, in other words, gender is how we express our gender.)

Oh boy, it’s a continuum…

Golob, MS (And Ms, of course)–also a girl.

But Golob insists gender identity is more than a mere social construct, it is also “a continuum. Our society has convinced us that there are just two options for gender identity, ‘male’ ‘female,’ based on biological sex. But in reality, there’s more fluidity!” See? Fluidity. Now your college students can feel haughtily superior as they condescend to inform you that gender isn’t about sex, but rather, “how we feel about ourselves” (because), “In reality, there’s more fluidity!” Tuition, by the way, is sky high, but worth it if your students learn to recognize reality.

Marching to La-la Land…

But none of what Goleb and Leech are blithering about has any association with reality. Almost the entire literature of gender re-identification is pure fantasy, or as Meriam Webster sentiently suggested back in 1913,”some fancied or imputed quality associated with sex.”

By now the properly programmed liberal will be furious with your humble editor, assuming him homophobic (properly meaning afraid of sameness but relegated lately to what Joseph Sobran called “hive speak,”or what we currently call political correctness. In this sense it connotes one who is hatefully predisposed toward homosexuals.  But this screed is not about homosexuality–not a bit of it. Rather, it protests the Liberal Order’s substitution of fantasy for biology, its abandonment of lexical precision in pursuit of that fantasy, and its casual ransacking of psychology en route to La-la Land.

The world according to Jesse…

Your editor shall now quote liberally (as it were) from an article by Jesse Belinsky that appeared on the website The Verge, Aug 8, 2022. In fairness to Jesse, who seems like a well intentioned bloke (or blokette), we’ll first explain that The Verge is a tech blog, thus Jesse’s article is understandably suffused with thoughts on social media and on-line realms. That said, Jesse also embodies the perfect conflation of fantasy and self-imagery that liberalism celebrates, although in Jesse’s case it is greatly accelerated by the Internet…which Jesse praises as a first-rate accelerant.

Jesse Belinsky, as he prefers to be represented.

Jesse writes that he attends a “fairly liberal high school,” and affirms having “come out as Gay,” but his insecurities remain troublesome because “in real life, I’m a tall, slightly chubby, pubescent boy with the acne and self-esteem to match.” It seems significant that “real life” is mentioned only in this context, and is otherwise sloughed off as unacceptably burdensome. 

Not all school counselors are judgey!

A good school counselor or qualified psychologist might guide Jesse to accept the physical realities of the here-and-now while tackling deficits he realistically desires to modify (e.g., his weight, social anxiety, and acne). If he wishes to embrace his sexual preferences and transvestism, therapy may help him there, too–but Jesse seeks release online. Online he is meeting up with his “pals,” and he is determined to dress appropriately. “I want to show off my sense of style,” Jesse writes, “so I spend a solid amount of time trying on different skirts, dresses, and accessories in order to find the cutest look.” But Jesse assays these fittings on his computer. The dresses and shoes aren’t fitted to his physical body, “but rather, on my villager in the world of Animal Crossing: New Leaf for the Nintendo 3DS.” We don’t know what that means exactly, as we last played a video game when Pong was all the rage, but obviously, Jesse can flaunt his transvestism ‘virtually,’ while concealing his body dysmorphia behind his monitor.

It’s a blessing… 

Jesse admits he would face embarrassment and ridicule if he dressed as a female in public,” but online he can “be whoever I want to be — within the confines of New Leaf’s binary gender system, skinny player models, and light skin tones, that is.” Well, no fantasy is perfect. Jesse concurs. “It’s not perfect by any means, but New Leaf is the first game…that lets male villagers wear feminine clothing and vice versa. So, for people like me…it’s a blessing.”

Is there a Shrink in the hut?

Time for your estrogen booster!

There may not be any villagers in New Leaf’s game who practice psychology, (nor apparently any staffers at Jesse’s “fairly liberal high school”) but if such a clinician appears he might recognize transvestism as one of eight paraphilias (sexual deviancies) somewhat bashfully detailed in the 5th edition of the American Psychiatric Association’s Diagnostic Statistical Manual (DSM-5).

If Jesse wished to discuss his transvestism with a professional he might discover that sexually-arousing fantasies entailing cross dressing are not uncommon in his age range–that homosexuals, bisexuals, and heterosexuals present with transvestism, that the symptoms often remit over time, often do not, and that the fundamental dangers are primarily to the transvestite–for obvious reasons.  Jesse might find ways to reduce or refocus his behaviors, or simply learn to function more comfortably within his diagnostic envelope.

The village shrink had best make haste, however, because as God is our witness, Jesse’s paraphilia will vanish from the always-trend-conscious DSM‘s next edition–following in the wake of such prior ejectees as homosexuality, ego-dystonic homosexuality, and sexual perversion, all flushed down the editorial memory hole.

The Search for Jesse’s Gender Identity…

Predictably, the computer simulations are soon insufficient to assuage Jesse’s yearnings. “I’m starting to wear skirts,” he writes….”I’m at the beginning of the process of figuring out my gender identity” and though still riven with incertitude, he is making progress. “[I] pierced my septum and my ears; and …recently began painting my nails. However, I still can’t bring myself to wear dresses or try earrings that are larger than studs…” 

A fashionista forever!

Jesse next praises Discord (the web platform, not the pejorative noun) exclaiming, “With the higher-resolution screen, brighter colors, and better graphics, the styles I choose…can really pop…and instead of asking me if I’m a boy or a girl …New Horizons asks me what my sense of style is…My friends and I can hop on Discord...I can now post screenshots of my villager on social media to say, “Hey! Check out my bangin’ style!”

But Jesse remains pessimistic owing to “the wave of transphobic fearmongering passing through the United States right now,” insisting his predilections make  computerized meeting places “more necessary than ever.” [More than ever? Seriously?] “I hope that queer youth are able to continue to use these digital playgrounds as a safe and fun space to play with gender…I’ll never be able to resist the life of an Animal Crossing fashionista.”

 Transphobia sweeps through the United States…

WOOF supports everyone’s right to dress stylishly.

We hope no one supposes this editorial an attack on Jesse. whose libertarian right to dress in feminine attire (‘bangin” or otherwise), we are predisposed  to defend. Jesse also retains the 1st amendment right to deem himself an occupant of any whimsically-excogitated “gender category” he likes– but not the right to make rational Americans pretend it’s real. That’s a bridge too far–a ‘right’ invented by the liberal establishment. Discerning Americans are well advised to oppose such flapdoodle.

It pains your editor to disappoint Jesse, but he needn’t bother himself further about his true gender identity. In skirts or out of skirts, you’re male Jesse. Even if you ultimately succumb to surgical mutilation to more persuasively disguise the fact, (as is your adult right), you will still be a male, however brutally amended. The Left will help you play dress-up and urge you to pretend otherwise–but it’s not so.

              Say, was that Ze with Zir? Are HU certan?

Seizing upon zany, nonsensical nonce terms to decorate one’s “gender identity” is really just another kind of transvestism. And eventually, probably after playing with numerous gender flavors, Jesse will opt for whichever current phrase strikes him as the sheikest –the most nearly perfect touch that gives his putative identity the most appealing glow. But he’ll still be a guy.


Read the rest of this entry »


In "Any way you slice it" forum on September 13, 2022 at 2:03 pm

We had to dig back to “Voyage to the Bottom of the Sea” to find a pic of a clearly sentient lobster, but here you go!

See? Just when you thought we were going all soft and opening up a culinary forum here on WOOF, it turns out to be more political carping (no ichthyologial pun intended), but we too were surprised to discover politics at the heart of this matter! Honestly, we were simply checking out recipes on the Internet, or so we thought.

Be it ever so humble…

Since the WOOF Cave is located on the coastline of the Atlantic, we harbor a powerful appreciation of coastal cuisine–certainly including mussels, clams, oysters, and especially lobster. Fun fact: Lobster was historically deemed almost inedible in Maine, where it was so commonly available that it was fed principally to prisoners, who complained about having to eat it. Clearly, the state’s indigenous crustacean has staged a resounding comeback.

“Lobster number four, step forward and say, ‘give me the money!'”

Nowadays, Mainers, like millions of their fellow Americans, cheerfully shell out (no ichthyological pun intended) hard earned and increasingly depreciating dollars for the pleasure of cracking the claws and forking out the meaty tail sections of huge, buttery, marvelously delectable lobsters. Participating in these voluptuary rites, we would argue, is as Yankee Doodle as chowing a Big Mac–A thoroughly American repastas customary a gustatory indulgence for American diners as ingesting the proverbial slice of apple pie (possibly with ice cream)! And given the supernal bonhomie that prevails wherever lobsters are joyfully gormandized, why would anyone set about sabotaging such events? What sort of fiends could derive pleasure from quashing these celebrations of gastronomic harmony?

We didn’t know either, when we first learned of lobster wars in the news–but the answer was soon apparent–all too familiarly apparent. The answer was liberals. That;s right, gentle readers, it transpires that lobsters are not woke, or, conversely, perhaps, they are so woke that they have removed themselves from the American menu.  Thus far, in the civilized world, only Switzerland, Austria, Norway, and New Zealand have officially banned the boiling of putatively cognizant lobsters, with the United Kingdom verging on similar legislation, but these bizarre misadventures are not so safely removed from our shores as may at first be supposed.

All over the Internet one encounters bizarre assertions to the effect that cooking lobsters is either illegal or barely legal in the United States.  But none of it seems reliably reported or even rationally explained. On the one hand, much media excitement is aroused by the idea that “boiling lobsters while they are alive could be made unlawful under new proposed animal welfare laws.” Currently the American Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill only contains laws relating to animals with a backbone (literally)– but this is being reviewed by the government. In other words, “boiling lobsters while they are alive could be made illegal under newly proposed animal welfare laws.” That said, one might be forgiven for wondering why the government is concerned with such redundancies when the boiling of invertebrates has, in fact, been banned in America since 1999.  That’s right–but don’t tell anybody.

We suspect a longstanding explanation of all this confusion may well be indifference–or rather, a bygone era of benign indifference lately dragged into public awareness by a gaggle of woke humanitarians bent on ruining everyone’s dinner. In other words, until recently, nobody thought about how to cook lobsters–we just cooked them.  And almost nobody this side of PETA paused to contemplate to what extent–if any–an invertebrate crustacean might momentarily suffer pain upon being dropped in a pot.  And even today, almost nobody ponders the vagaries of the Lacey Act, or for that matter, seems to know it exists.  We feel bad letting the news out, but the Lacey Act is real!

A gaggle of woke humanitarians bent on ruining dinner.

The Lacey Act?

Colin Ley–the light bringer!

As Colin Ley (normally an expert on financial asset protection), put it in a recent column: “This is probably news to you and you may be doubting what I write. The fact is though, New Zealand banned boiling lobsters alive…back in 1999. I’m not sure how you’re supposed to legally kill a lobster in New Zealand. Perhaps a humane suffocation? That’s besides [sic] the point…the law reads that no live lobster shall be tossed into a boiling pot of water.” So, “since it is illegal to boil a live lobster in New Zealand, it is therefore illegal to boil a live lobster in the USA.”

Ridiculous, you say? Not hardly.  The New Zealand law matters in America because we passed the Lacey Act in 1900, to protect plants and wildlife.  Obviously it has not been against the law to cook a lobster in America until recently, so why is it illegal now? Because of New Zealand pioneering humane pro-invertebrate legislation to which we were immediately, though retroactively, bound.

It is, in fact, a federal crime to boil a live lobster because the Lacey Act declared it a federal crime to “possess any fish or wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of any law or regulation of any State or in violation of any foreign law [emphasis added] or Indian tribal law.” So  Americans have been legally prohibited from boiling lobsters since a foreign law (to wit, New Zealand’s law) banned the process in 1999. If that seems preposterous, take heart. The law is real, but almost nobody knows it exists. So, shhh!

Stop that bear!

In fact, the Lacy Act is so obscure in this context that liberals are currently going to considerable lengths to pass a new (and stunningly unnecessary) law doing what Lacey already does, or at least would do, if it were better known or enforced. Fortunately, nobody in recent memory–at least in America–has been perp-walked by federal authorities for attempting to prepare a lobster dinner–but liberalism, as we know, never sleeps!  As evidence, there is much ado online reviewing contemporary efforts to ban lobster boiling, and a good deal of congratulatory verbiage aimed at the United Kingdom, where “progress” is considered visible.  “Ministers,” declares the UK Independent, “are planning to strengthen the welfare rights of crustaceans and molluscs in the Animal Welfare (Sentience) Bill, which is currently making its way through the House of Lords.”

Evidently, the House of Lords feels a certain consanguinity with clams.

Happy as a humanely cooked clam!

Boris Johnson assures a supporter of his safety.

That’s correct, gentle readers, the Ministers of Great Britain are not content to ruin lobster dinners, they are also intent on saving mollusks from agonizing deaths. A bill, which enjoyed the support of Boris Johnson (before he wound up in…well…hot water) acknowledges that crustaceans and molluscs are sentient beings and therefore must have rights.This means clams, as well as mussels, oysters, and scallops, will soon be spared boiling or steaming. Presumably, it is difficult to shoot oysters or to electrocute clams–so options are not readily apparent, but the House of Lords has nothing better to do just now, so they are saving the mollusks. Thus, the question is clearly begged, what does one do to one’s lobster (or one’s favorite gastropod, cephalopod, or bivalve) in order to cook it more compassionately?

“No exit strategy”

Charlotte and friend.

Here, we are proud to note, Maine is in the forefront of the effort to cook lobsters more lovingly…and the answer turns out to be marijuana. Esquire reports that Maine lobsters are “dying a happier death thanks to the efforts of Charlotte Gill, the owner of Charlotte’s Legendary Lobster Pound in Maine.” Charlotte, by lucky coincidence, is also a licensed medical marijuana caregiver (one of which you cannot throw a rock in Maine without hitting). Charlotte told the  Mount Desert Islander that she felt bad cooking lobsters on her premises with “no exit strategy.”

Roscoe chills out…

But when Charlotte “hotboxed” a pioneer lobster named Roscoe, exposing him to massive infusions of marijuana fumes,  “he chilled out,” and appeared to greet the boiling water with remarkable equanimity. But as perfect a solution as Charlotte’s technique might seem, it fails to satisfy the preclusions of the Lacey Act. Roscoe (like all his relatives subsequently “hotboxed” by Charlotte Gill), was nevertheless boiled to death, albeit serenely. And the law, if the Lacey Act  is properly consulted, will not abide such inhumanity to seafood.

“Like, man, can I have one more hit?”

Inspired by Gill’s efforts, scientists at the University of California San Diego; Colorado College; and the University of Washington, recreated the pot-to-pot research method, only without bringing their water to a fatal boil. Their methods produced no firm findings as to whether marijuana truly calms lobsters, or even whether lobsters feel pain in the first place. And how one might go about cooking lobsters if one’s ethical compunctions rule out boiling them, remains–well–hotly debated.

The alternatives seem sub-optimal. Swiss chefs, who are forbidden by law to boil a live lobster, are encouraged to first sedate the lobsters by electrocuting them or “stabbing them in the eyes.” (WOOF is not making this up.) Neither option strikes us as markedly less cruel than just  tossing them in the pot, but what do we know?

The perspicacious reader may, by now, feel assured that lobster law is so fraught with contradictions, hypocrisies, and internal paradoxes that the entire crusade to banish the boiling pot will surely collapse of its inherent inconsistencies. Indeed, the day may dawn when, despite all the folderol and moralistic pretense, the Lacey Act is deemed blue–a risible side-note of culinary history. But not so fast.

The anti-lobstering lobby has moved from woke to woker. Never mind the paroxysms of pain the coastal crustaceans may (or may not) suffer in the interest of humankind’s epicurean demands. All those arguments, together with everything you’ve just read, (we should have warned you in advance) are now utterly passé. That’s because you can’t eat lobsters nobody catches– and you can’t catch lobsters nobody fished for. And you can’t fish for lobsters because–guess what! We need to save the whales! (Again.)

Lobsters versus Whales: The “Red List!”

*$#^% lobster fishermen!

That’s right. Lobstering now threatens Moby Dick–well, Moby wasn’t a Right Whale, but you get the picture– and we couldn’t resist the illustration. It seems all lobstering must halt immediately or Right Whales will all get killed by lobster traps.

Never mind the fact that no record exists of a Wright Whale perishing in, near, or because of, any Maine lobsterman’s traps. Comes now the ultra-woke “fish-sustainability” activism from Monterey Bay Aquarium in California, (where the lobsters are terrible anyway).  Monterey Bay Aquarium has gone to pains to supply the country with a publication called, Seafood Watch, downgrading all lobsters taken by lobster traps to a glaring red “AVOID” status, which is Seafood Watch‘s lowest possible rating. This places lobster on the publication’s dreaded “red list.” It couldn’t be much plainer–eat a lobster, kill a whale. 

The right Right Whale–looking surprisingly unfettered.

Seafood Watch insists that 80% of right whales have been entangled in fishing gear “at least once.” But who interviewed the whales–and doesn’t this seem to suggest they are pretty good at getting away? And make no mistake, Maine’s lobstermen are furious at the injustice of the rating. First, they point out, their existing traps are so heavily regulated by State and Federal inspectors that it is virtually infeasible that any Right Whale, no matter how masochistically determined, could become prolongedly ensnared, let alone deceased.  Beyond that, the Maine Lobstermen’s Association pointed out, “Maine lobstermen have not had an interaction with Right Whales in nearly 20 years.”

Hmph! If you ask us, RED CHANNELS had a much catchier cover!

Allison Ferreira, the pecksniff from NOAA.

Allison Ferreira of the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration, which apparently oversees the country’s fisheries, countered that just because Right Whales have not been identified in any recent interactions with lobstermen does not mean fatalities don’t occur. Pressed, however, Ferreira  admitted that of 1,600 alleged entanglement scars and incidents evaluated by New England Aquarium, only about 16 have been traced back to a fishing location, in other words 1%. Obviously, the whales just aren’t trying.

Woke, Inc…

But woke culture is undeterred.  Once the call to arms is sounded, no matter how atonally, nothing matters except virtue signaling…and the biggest virtue signalers around the globe are not the soccer moms or the callow college sophomores–they are the corporations whose greatest fear is earning the enmity of the elite Left.

Save the arugula!

Humanitarians of the Left, rejoice! You have nothing to lose but your lobsters–and we know, most of you stick to tofu and arugula anyway. But now there’s more good news on the feel-good front…


Read the rest of this entry »

The Sayings of Joe Biden–Wit and Wisdom from America’s only Zombie President!

In "See you in the funnies" forum on August 5, 2022 at 11:17 am

We know what you’re thinking–who needs further evidence that Joe Biden is a mental disaster? For that matter, who would be nasty enough to make fun of a man who is obviously impaired cognitively? Isn’t that tasteless and cruel? Well, consider two points. First, the majority of liberals do not believe or have any clue that Joe Biden is a doddering, bumbling  embarrassment, living, as they do, in the bubble of sanitized leftist reporting that painstakingly edits Joe’s verbal fumbles and tosses his cognitive word salads to resemble something akin to purposive English.  Highly intelligent liberals we know scoff at the notion that Biden has mental difficulties and insist that videos showing such blatherings are “edited by the far right,” and are, of course, “debunked” [which see].  It is mainly for their sake that we offer this primer in the unbridled dumbness and incoherence of the 46th president’s official and casual utterances…but the rest of us can get a good laugh out of it, and sometimes one has to laugh to keep from crying.

Always an idiot…

Maybe you have to be a Norwegian to figure this out?

This should simultaneously address the second concern we voiced–in other words, is it cruel to make fun of the King for being naked? Yes, except in circumstances wherein noticing the King’s nakedness constitutes a vital revelation to his befuddled subjects, as well as an insight necessary to rational governance. Our first responsibility, then, is to demonstrate the President’s psychological deficiencies–not to politely pretermit them. We have an entire media complex devoted to the polite erasure (or at best, the hinky rationalizing) of the man’s deficits.

As most of us are already aware, these problems were observable long before the election of 2020, even though the media pretended they weren’t–even  bestowing upon him ridiculous accolades, calling him, for example, “the savviest foreign-policy thinker in the Senate” (ABC News, 2008). In truth, sadly, the President was always a nincompoop, and he is increasingly unmoored from even the most fundamental sensibilities.

He who says “A”…

The legendary WFB Jr, reminding us not to say “B.”

Biden was always an impulsive liar, for that matter, but it seems increasingly unlikely that he recognizes his own prevarications as such. In short, the press was committed to defending Biden’s spoken ludicrosities long before he thanked “the most extensive and inclusive voter fraud organization in the history of American politics,” for elevating him to the presidency, (an accidental venture into truth telling that USA Today “fact checked” and dismissed because “since the beginning of his campaign, Biden’s foot has been no stranger to his mouth.”) Ha, ha–see? Debunked! No one should take Joe seriously, and therefore, no one should suggest Joe has a problem. But as William F. Buckley, Jr. often remarked, “If ‘A’ does not equal ‘B,’ than he who says ‘A’ cannot say ‘B.'”

Debunked..so he never said that right? Well, okay, he said it, but he was probably way too out of it to know what he was saying, so the whole idea that he said it at all is debunked, see?

Too, as with his election-fraud shout-out, Biden’s “gaffes” often have the ring of undisciplined truthfulness.  Remember during the campaign when he was asked how he and running mate Kamala Harris would resolve a major policy dispute, should one emerge between them? Biden frankly (and to Harris’s evident dismay), assured baffled CNN interviewers that, “I will develop some disease and say I have to resign.”  The quote has, of course, spiraled down the memory hole with sundry other Bidenisms, like the time Biden updated the Democrat caucus on his 900-billion-dollar stimulus package, chirruping, “If we do everything right, if we do it with absolute certainty, there’s still a 30% chance we’re going to get it wrong!” Right, and a 100% chance we’re going to get more inflation.

Inflation makes you stronger…

Fortunately for citizens concerned about inflation, Biden has determined that inflation is a kind of Nietzschean character builder, going so far as to tell a labor conference, “the number one threat is the strength, and that number one strength that we built is inflation!”

Russians did it!

Like, suddenly she’s Joe McCarthy?

Strength or not, Biden last week touted wage growth as a means of curbing inflation even after a new report showed prices climbing at the highest rate in 40 years, which, by the way, accounts for a lot of “wage growth,” which is is turn, well, never mind. Bidden blamed Putin’s “ruthless attack on the Ukraine,”for the additional two-dollar hike in gasoline prices,” insisting that “Ulmamitly [sic] the reason gas prices are up, is because of Russia!” But this could work out well because we will soon all switch to electric vehicles, according to Biden, because we are in “a great transition.” (So thank you, Vladimir Putin?)

“The Liberal World Order…”

Can we skip straight to “beyond?”

When asked why Americans should be expected to regard their current circumferences as “sustainable,” White House spokesman Brian Deese replied:,  “What you heard from the president today was a clear articulation [sic] of the stakes–this is about the future of the Liberal World Order and we have to stand firm.” Yipes.

It’s gotten to the point that smaller goofs and bizarre revelations hardly draw attention, like only last month when Biden welcomed an utterly unsuspecting Switzerland into NATO, and declared regime change in Russia inevitable– possibly to curtail what he is currently calling “Putin price hikes” and “Putin gas costs” while continuing–two years into his administration–to label inflation “transitory”…or, apparently, just until we get rid of Putin..

‘Ill-begotten’ gains…

To further emphasize the punishments his administration has in store for Putin and his band of price-hiking oligarchs, Biden gave a televised speech in which he repeatedly attempted to pronounce the word “kleptocracy” without success, saying instead, “we are going to accommodate [sic] the Russian oligarchs, and make sure that we take their ill-begotten [sic] gains. Heh, heh, we’re going to accommodate [sic] them! We’re going to seize their yachts, their luxury homes, and other ill-begotten gains of  Putin’s kepletoert–er–kloc–yeahhh-uh-lipto-ta-ta-cy...But these are bad guys.” (Kleptocrats, that is.) And in case you think Biden was simply enjoying the irony of the verb “accommodate” be aware that the White House transcript disallowed the word, assuring readers that Biden meant to say “hold accountable.” Surely you got that, right? Much of the press got it, apparently, and dutifully made the substitution in their print versions of his speech.

Remember: American Indians are Native Americans, but Indian Americans are from India.

His problems with race go back well before he called Barack Obama “…the first mainstream African-American who is articulate and bright and clean and a nice-looking guy–” But this article isn’t about Joe Biden’s sociopolitical history or voting record–it’s about his verbal wanderings, like the time he assured an emigre from India that emigrants from India adored him, shouting: “In Delaware the largest growth in population is from Indian Americans–moving from India–” (as supposedly evinced by the fact that) “In Delaware you cannot go to a 7/11 or as Dunkin’ Donuts unless you have a slight Indian accent, and I’m not joking!” Apparently Biden wished to  stress job availability for that demographic.

“White kids…”

Mysteriously underemployed actress with friend.

Actress Kirstie Alley may have exaggerated when she called Biden’s racial gaffes “constant,” but there are certainly more than can be detailed here. A standout example is his infamous reminder to Chris Wallace that his candidacy was sure to attract southerners because “Delaware was a slave state,” which ranks with his reassurances (offered during a town-hall hosted by the Asian & Latino Coalition), that “poor kids are just as bright and just as talented as white kids.”

“Lincoln or John Lewis?”

Quick, Jefferson Davis or Abraham Lincoln!? Those answering “Davis” are probably too dense to grasp this website–and you definitely “ain’t Black!”

Even race-baiting, that tried-and-true Democrat tradition, is unsafe from Biden’s lips. He failed dismally to rally an audience at the University of Atlanta by rhetorically demanding, “Do you want to be on the side of Dr. King or George Wallace? Do you want to be on the side of John Lewis or Bull Connor? Do you want to be on the side of Abraham Lincoln or Jefferson Davis?” Seriously? It wasn’t so much that Biden’s audience didn’t know who those people were, but rather as if they were unfamiliar to Biden.  Wallace and Connor were not only rabid racists, but also staunch Democrats. Abraham Lincoln, whom Biden presumably intended to laud, was the first Republican president. Jefferson Davis, prior to leading the slave states into rebellion, was a Democrat–and between King and Lewis, only Lewis became  a Democrat; King always shunned political alliances.

Sailor Joe?

So what on earth did Biden mean to ask? Why, for that matter, would he tell one town-hall audience, “I got started out of an HBCU: Delaware State. Now, I don’t want to hear anything negative about Delaware State. They’re my folks!” Except Biden’s “folks” noted he’d never attended Delaware State University. For that matter, he was never enrolled at any historically Black college or university. Biden’s mysterious claim was remindful of his remarks to graduating midshipmen at the United States Naval Academy that he himself had been “appointed to Annapolis in 1965” by Sen. J. Caleb Boggs, which is total bilge.  It’s reasonable to wonder: Does Joe Biden  believe these whoppers as he so casually utters them? The mind boggles.

Does he really believe he was arrested with Nelson Mandela in South Africa? Does he really believe he was arrested in the ’60s during the civil rights movement, as he often maintains?  Is he a licensed tractor trailer driver who spent one summer driving 18-wheeler big rigs, as he told  his audience at a Mack Truck assembly plant? No. Did he go to the Tree of Life synagogue, as he vividly recalls, in the wake of the horrendous antisemitic shootings there? He did not. In fact, he never set foot there according to the surviving Rabbi. Nor is he the recipient of three masters degrees, nor did he graduate from any college with with honors. What sort of space case, really, carries on like this? And let’s not even get started on “CornPop.”

Charlemagne is not amused!

Yes, Virginia, there really is a Charlemagne the God. But he never met CornPop.

In Danville, Virginia, when then VP candidate Biden warned an audience of Blacks that Mitt Romney wanted to put them back in chains, Black Democrat Charles Rangel, congressman from New York, took to the radio long enough to call Biden “stupid.” How can so obvious an insight continue to elude so many? It did not long elude “Charlemagne the God,” co-host of the morning radio show “The Breakfast Club,” which attracts a large African American listenership.  After telling Charlemagne in 2020 that any members of his audience thinking about voting for Donald Trump “ain’t Black,” he proceeded to denounce Trump as the”first racist to be elected president,” which may have gotten Woodrow Wilson off the hook, but induced Charlemagne to snap, “I really wish Joe Biden would shut the eff up forever.” You are not alone, Charlemagne the God.

Some of us took exception, also, to Biden’s recent description of “the MAGA movement” as “really the most extreme political organization that’s existed in American history…” shrinking the KKK, The American Nazi Party, and the American Communist Party, into seaming insignificance.

Subversive activities surpassing all others?

Back to the Mainland!

While in Warsaw, Biden bellowed that if Putin uses chemical weapons in the Ukraine “it will trigger a response in kind!” The idea of our forces using (or distributing) chemical weapons in the region continues to strike WOOF as, well, un-American, but nobody elected us president.

The harried but steadfast Jen Psaki–walking it all back again.

After his cadre of overworked correctors (cynically dubbed “the mop-up crew” by insiders), walked back Biden’s nerve-gas threat, some mischief-maker at C-SPAN asked Biden if, although unwilling to get involved militarily in Ukraine,  he was, “willing to get involved militarily to defend Taiwan if it comes to that?” Biden replied that he was. C-SPAN’s reporter  marveled, “You are?” Biden replied, “Yes. It’s a commitment we made.” Gosh, if poor, overworked Jen Psaki hadn’t burnt so much midnight oil reversing the president on this blooper, while lavishing lip service on the subversive one-China policy, Biden might have enjoyed our support for a glorious moment! But no, even while complaining that President Biden cannot, seemingly, “catch a break from all the bad headlines,” what little remains of Newsweek‘s editorial staff defended Maoist chapter and verse, reminding its several readers that “China considers Taiwan to be part of its sovereign territory, while the U.S. pursues a One China policy that recognizes only one Chinese government—the one based in Beijing.” And blah, blah, blah. 

WOOF’s support for Taiwan is a lot stronger than the State Department’s!


Read the rest of this entry »

WHEN PIGS FLY (or) How the Ghost of Robert McNamara Haunts the F-35.

In "Defense Mechanisms" forum on June 25, 2022 at 5:50 pm

flying pigA lot of what amounts to American air superiority seems to ramify from good luck. No, we don’t mean to suggest that our pilots and airmen just get lucky up there, far from it. All we mean to say is, at various times of crisis a variety of somewhat remarkable circumstances have resulted in the right plane for the right moment in the right conflict, and made the job of the enemy impossibly difficult. Take Korea for instance.

Everybody at the Pentagon figured that American air power would run roughshod over North Korea’s forces when Truman commanded our military to intervene in the face of the surprise onslaught of Communist aggressors in 1950, and at first our P-51 Mustangs, F-80 Shooting Stars and F-84 Thunderjets dominated North Korea’s air space. That all changed, however, on November 1, 1950, when sleek, nimble, silver jets displaying the red star of international Communism filled the skies, demonstrating a marked superiority to anything the USAF had in theater. The enemy jet was the now-legendary MiG-15, and on April 12, 1951, MiGs intercepted thirty-six B-29 bombers under escort by nearly one hundred F-80s and F-84s.  After inflicting tremendous damage on the bombers while overwhelming all efforts by the American fighters to blunt their attacks, the enemy planes turned North and shot away unscathed. American Bomber command abruptly halted daylight sorties over enemy territory and our B-29 Super-fortresses remained grounded for three months while the situation was frantically reassessed.

MIG 15

The MiG 15, Commie pilots, Nazi technology, Rolls Royce engines.

Consternation over the Commie jet with Rolls Royce engines (the Russians being our loyal allies during WWII, remember?) flying at 600 mph while blowing our bombers out of the sky with a combination of 23-and-37 mm cannon, swept the avionics industry back home. The existence and development of the Soviet jet was known to U.S. intelligence, but nobody expected the Russians to commit it to action in Korea, and nobody entirely realized its potential in battle.  It seems unbelievable from our present vantage point that swept wings were not immediately recognized as integral to the MiG’s superior flight characteristics. In fact, back at North American Aviation the word was that their new XP-86 was about to be cancelled by the Air Force because despite being lighter and marginally faster than the Navy’s FJ-1 Fury, early flight tests showed it performed similarly to the XP-80 and XP-84, neither of which could tackle MiGs with confidence.

Be that as it may, a Navy F9F “Panther” won the first jet-to-jet fight in Korea.

Back in Ohio, North American’s designers brainstormed frantically in search of some game changing tweak that could rekindle the XP-86’s fortunes. It was then that a handful of imported technicians with less than salubrious past affiliations proved helpful. A cadre of officially Americanized German aerodynamicists looked at the MiG and nodded knowingly. The former Nazis already knew that swept wings not only reduced drag substantially, but also minimized the effects of “compressibility” –the problem that destabilized, and even disintegrated straight-winged aircraft when approaching the speed of sound. German data from the end of World War II proved that a swept wing combined with slats that ensured stability at lower speeds was the means by which jets could achieve transonic speeds and dogfight at the edge of the envelope.

The good guys....

The good guys arriving in the nick of time!

Thus, in the nick of time, (to generalize and oversimplify matters in our customary fashion), three squadrons of swept-winged F-86 “Sabres” arrived in the Far East and took to the skies over the Yalu River. This ended the primacy of the free-ranging MiG-15s. By the time our “police action” in Korea staggered to its conclusion in 1953, F-86 pilots were credited with shooting down 792 MiGs at a loss of only 78 Sabres, a victory ratio of ten to one. True, The Soviets (who were actually flying a lot of the MiGs) and their Red Chinese and North Korean comrades, claim to have knocked down in excess of 600 F-86 Sabres, but these claims meet our editorial standards for denunciation as commie lies, besides which production figures at North American make the estimate implausible, besides which any kid who grew up reading war comics knows the F-86 kicked butt.

comic panel

Russ Heath’s original comic book panel, swiped by pop artist Roy Lichtenstein who inexplicably turned Heath’s Sabre into a P-51 in his classic pop-art painting “Whaam!”


When things got “Strange”…


Care to venture a guess as to how the Aardvark got its name?

One could make the case we made above about a lot of aircraft, from the P-51 Mustang through to the F-14 Tomcat and F-16, and we’d still get angry emails or nasty Reddit comments about the planes we forgot to mention–but you could place odds against the likelihood of anybody objecting that we omitted the F-111 Aardvark.

Having said that, we are fully aware that before its retirement in the mid-90’s, the “Aardvark” performed certain duties with considerable aplomb. These included executing President Reagan’s one-night-long air war against Libya, which sufficed to put Qaddafi [this month’s spelling] out of the terrorism business (despite which, of course, Mrs. Clinton later had him butchered for good behavior), and delivering precision weaponry on target during the first Persian Gulf War.  Aardvark enthusiasts might also tout the aircraft’s many innovative qualities, and we fully agree; the F-111 was the first warplane to employ the “swing wing” technologies, for example, later applied by Grumman in designing the Tomcat.


TRUE FACT: The legendary F-14 Tomcat did all its own stunts in the popular film “Top Gun.”

But here we are getting ahead of our own digression. Our purpose in mentioning the F-111 is to revisit the jet’s essential failures as a multi-purpose, money-saving aircraft.  And this means turning to a particularly distasteful subject, namely, Robert Strange McNamara.  Some of you, understandably, may not be familiar with the life achievements, or, for that matter, the very existence of Robert Strange McNamara, so let us swiftly review his storied career:

Brain Boy


Remember “Brain Boy” comics? Who knew Dell could do super heroes?

It isn’t everybody who gets a specific variety of logical miscalculation named after him, but Robert Strange McNamara received that dubious honor. The “McNamara fallacy” is best described by Daniel Yankelovich who nailed the phenomenon in his ’70s volume, Corporate Priorities: A Continuing Study of the New Demands on Business, writing:  “The first step is to measure whatever can be easily measured. This is OK as far as it goes. The second step is to disregard that which can’t be easily measured or to give it an arbitrary quantitative value. This is artificial and misleading. The third step is to presume that what can’t be measured easily really isn’t important. This is blindness. The fourth step is to say that what can’t be easily measured really doesn’t exist. This is suicide.”  These simple steps to disaster perfectly synopsize the managerial technique of the man they called the best and the brightest of two administrations.

Brain Boy

Even today, Americans with no recollection of 1958, probably recognize the name “Edsel.” The Edsel automobile was presented by Ford Motors as an automotive and design phenomenon that would rock the car industry, but it turned out to be a colossal failure, making the car’s name synonymous with epic marketing disasters. One reason the Edsel failed so ignominiously was Robert McNamara..

edsels-magesIt wasn’t that McNamara had anything to do with designing the Edsel–he rather more could be said to have un-designed it. He demanded the abandonment of the dual wheelbases and separate bodies used in the first Edsels of 1958, insisting that all Edsels share the basic Ford platform and use the Ford’s chassis structure. This reduced the struggling Edsel to little more than a glorified Ford sedan with idiosyncratic ornamentation. Next, McNamara cut the Edsel’s lavish advertising budget, and then slashed it a second time. This drove a spike through the project’s already degenerated heart; the Edsel became quickly extinct.

On to Havana!

Freshly ensconced in Camelot, McNamara beguiled JFK with his genius and immersed himself in solidifying plans for the Bay of Pigs invasion, a plan developed during Eisenhower’s tenure that became operational under Kennedy. The idea was that 1,500 Cubans, trained and equipped by the Central Intelligence Agency, would be hurled ashore in Cuba, backed by powerful naval and air support.  But  McNamara’s penchant for economizing soon found flaws in the logistical structure of the original plan, resulting in a last minute change of location for the assault. Less aviation fuel and air time were required to support an invasion if it was staged at beaches bordering the Bahía de Cochinos (Bay of Pigs) in Las Villas Province, so it seemed only logical to make the shift.

fl-bayofpigs-brigade-flag-jpg-20160420But the last minute change had real-world consequences that were unforeseen by the Whiz Kid and his devoted staff.Paratroops sent ahead to secure vital arteries of supply found themselves dropping into swampland from which their heavy equipment proved inextricable. Offshore masses that reconnaissance photos dismissed as “seaweed” turned out to be impenetrable coral reefs that stymied attempts to supply the invasion by sea.  It didn’t help that the Cuban people proved disinclined to throw themselves immediately into supporting the invasion. While JFK’s refusal to commit additional American assets (which could easily have decided the issue) sealed the fate of the bedraggled invaders, a generous portion of blame for the fiasco was ascribable to Robert McNamara.

On to Vietnam!

McNamara in his personal Huey, counting bodies while touring Vietnam.

It is an odd illustration of their differences that while Kennedy was saving the Green Berets from extinction, his Secretary of Defense was busy deciding that all branches of the military should wear the same shoes, hats, and uniforms–to save money.  In fact, McNamara seemed oblivious of any considerations related to tradition, morale, or even warcraft, focusing entirely on arithmetical factors related to the bottom line. To his credit, he helped Curtis LeMay and Eugene Stoner clear the way for the Armalite AR-15, but one cannot credit his role in surmounting conventional opposition to the weapon that entered service as the M-16 without adding that he was also substantially responsible for its initial tendency to jam in the Southeast Asian climate. The failure to chrome the chamber of M-16s was a cost-saving measure of the sort McNamara prided himself on. As Christopher R. Bartocci wrote in Small Arms Review,  “The blame here goes not to the Ordnance Corp but to the ‘Wiz Kids’ on Secretary of Defense McNamara’s staff who made all the decisions. This micromanagement of money in resources and decisions was made by people who had not the slightest clue about small arms.” Or cars, for that matter–or the drawbacks inherent in swampy amphibious landing zones.

Besides attempting to make Vietnam a war of attrition in accordance with his mathematical instincts (though having no bearing on realities in the field),the debaucher of the Edsel turned his attention to advanced aircraft design.  It amazed McNamara that the Air Force, the Navy, and the Marines each voiced individual demands for a jet fighter. Waste, waste, waste, he grumbled.

Pontificating on the path to victory in Vietnam…

Pilot and copilot sit side by side in the F-111–handy for Sunday drives, not so good for dog-fighting.

Obviously, McNamara explained, one plane that satisfied the requirements of each of the relevant services was the intelligent solution–a thrifty resolution to the entire menu of demands packaged as one, rather than several aircraft.  And just as obviously, McNamara was wrong again. It wasn’t that the F-111 was a bad airplane, it was just too many varieties of “good” to be good enough. It served too many masters to make a useful home with any.  Significantly, A fighter variant, the F-111B, was not accepted for production although the Air Force used the F-111 to good effect through 1967, and used variants into the ’90s.


Deja Vu all over again….

Lightnings burning brightly–by accident.

There can be little doubt that the McNamara method of masterminding haunted the F-35 from inception. Built to satisfy a plethora of service-driven demands, the aircraft came in overweight, under-powered, and over budget, and so expensively so that waves of F-22 Raptors might have been fielded instead.  But in the long run, is the deployment of the F-35 “Lightning”  another one-size-fits all, McNamara-style cluster flub with a stupendous price tag, or a boon to American air power where techno-wizardry and a basic Yankee willingness to spend the big bucks ultimately overcame a multitude of drawbacks?

Dems for close ground support…..

Smile! The A-10 remains a Democrat keeper.

One very real problem with the F-35 turns out to be the lobby for the A-10. No, nobody in congress (well, almost nobody) is dumb enough to suggest the Warthogs render the F-35s unnecessary, but the sentimental up-swell on the Hill sees the A-10s as too young to die. Sentiment aside, as Mike Stone writes at Reuters, “The negotiations over the A-10, which the Air Force has wanted to retire for more than two decades, show the extensive measures Democrats will take to protect their slim majority in the Senate.” If Democrats desperate to keep warplanes in service sounds a bit weird, consider that a base full of Warthogs contributes around three billion dollars per annum to neighboring economies.Thus, Democratic Senator Jack Reed, (e.g.) the chairman of the Senate Armed Services Committee, prohibited any A-10 retirements in his draft of the 2022 National Defense Authorization Act.

READ MORE… Read the rest of this entry »

Everything We Needed to Know about America’s Self-destruction, We Learned from HUAC!

In Just say HUAC forum on May 30, 2022 at 10:40 am

Okay, we agree, the long gone House UnAmerican Activities Committee is as much a source of risible embarrassment as it ever was satisfaction. This, after all, is the committee whose members warned America of such communist code words as “hootenanny” and inquired into the possible communist sympathies of 16th century playwright Christopher Marlowe, (who turned out to be innocent). But even this gang that couldn’t shoot straight had its moments, such as showcasing Whittaker Chambers’s unmasking of the communist spy Alger Hiss, and yes, exposing the (subsequently lionized) “Hollywood Ten” as a cabal of Marxist agents of influence entrenched in the motion picture industry.

More recently, movies like “Trumbo” celebrate these selfsame communists, as though whoever connives to  infuse popular entertainments with Red propaganda is a reasonable subject for iconification.  This perceptual  distortion has been so tidily insinuated over the decades that anyone willing to name such individuals publicly, say Eli Kazan, is eternally blighted, even as the authentically culpable are slobbered over.  But who, nowadays, sows such confusion, and how?          

To reply, “communists!” is no longer entirely correct, unless the term’s proper understanding is adjusted to delineate the actions of those philosophically infected by communists. In other words, the working class citizen who rolls down his pickup truck’s window long enough to holler “Commie!” at an Antifa drone, or at the proverbial grandma in sneakers jiggling a Bernie Sanders placard, is technically inexact.  His targets are unlikely to qualify as communists in the traditional sense. Except in a few, extremely rare cases. few of this sort could mumble anything coherent regarding materialist methodology, or the theory of surplus value; neither, nowadays, could most advocates of “Marxist Feminism”or liberation theology. 

But this is a bit like insisting your uncle doesn’t have Covid because he’s contracted a variant.  The definitional niceties don’t make him any less ill–or the virus any less virulent.  Similarly, the mutated spawn of Marxist-Leninism remains hostile to basic Americanism, by which we mean the freedoms of the ballot, the bill of rights, the free enterprise system, individual movement and self-directed employment.

It’s not that today’s new masses are stupider than before–they’re just much better brainwashed!

It may seem as though we are saying that modern communists often do not recognize themselves and even those self-describing as such have little awareness of what that means, apart from signifying their polemical hostility toward the above-noted liberties. And to a large extent that is exactly what we mean. 

This is hardly to say the textbook communism of the 1930s-1970s has withered on the vine.  Rather it has become the vine from which springs every malformed ideation from the Weather Underground to Occupy Wall Street. To a considerable extent this explains the “horseshoe” consanguinities of the political Left and the so-called Alt-Right.  To locate descriptions of these essential commonalities, and identify their constituencies, one can invest considerable time studying numerous scholarly works on a wide range of pertinent topics, or, one can pull out a tattered, time-mottled publication issued by HUAC in 1949, when commies were commies, and McCarthyites yet to be blacklisted for objecting.  

Alger Hiss, guilty of communist espionage long before McCarthy roamed the land!

And with just a modicum of mental adjustment one can readily apply HUAC’s tips to the progeny of that era, and its evolved presence in American culture today.  Care to play? Here follows a selection of handy (and superficially corny) tips from the Committee suggesting how communists may be singled out, and with certain glaring exceptions, i.e., the allegedly-telltale use of the putative  code word “hootenanny,”(not included below), may be identified by certain characteristics that remain remarkably stable. 

We figure Billy Jo was a good American.

Granted, the booklet itself contains 100 such tips, but since everyone knows WOOF articles are always too long, we’ve chosen a bulleted set of just 20 questions to make our point, beginning with:

  • 1. What is Communism?  An obvious first question featuring what we might deem an in-obviously broad response, i.e.: Communism is a system by which a small group of people seek to rule the world. Here we can envision shrieks of agony from college professors and Marxist dialecticians, but so far as this definition is objectively applicable, it isn’t wrong.  And so…
  • 2. How do communists try to get control in countries they intend to rule? Answer: Legally, or illegally, anyway they can. CONSPIRACY is the banc method of Communism in countries it is trying to capture. Its first big victory was through bloody revolution. [But] every one since has been by military conquest, internal corruption, or the threat of these.
  • 3: What would happen if communism were to come into control in this country? ANSWER: Every man, woman, and child would come under communist discipline.
  • 4: Would I be better off than I am now?  ANSWER: No.
  • 5: Could I go to school? ANSWER: You could go to the kind of school the communists tell you to, and nowhere else. You could go only as long as they let you.
  • 6: Could I keep my job? ANSWER: No, you would work at what you were told, where you were told, for wages set by the government.
  • 7: Could I leave my property to my family when I die?  ANSWER: No, because you wouldn’t own any property. All property would be owned by the state.
  • 8: Could I belong to a church? ANSWER: In Russia, the Communist Party tried for thirty years to destroy religion, and failed. Then, they applied the same principles of internal control and subversion from the inside. They are already adding these techniques to American religion.
  • 9: Could I start a business and hire people? ANSWER: No. To do so would be a crime for which you would be severely punished.
  • 10: Could I teach what I please, or do research with academic freedom? ANSWER: You could teach only what communists authorize you to teach. Research would be approved by the party.
  • 11: Could I vote communists out of control? ANSWER: No, no communist government has ever allowed that to happen once power has been seized.
  • 12: But doesn’t communism promise poor people a better break? ANSWER: Promising more than can be delivered is an old trick…try comparing communist results to communist promises in countries where communists have seized power.
  • 13: Why shouldn’t I turn communist? ANSWER: You know what the United States is like today. If you want it exactly the opposite, you should turn communist. But first, remember, you will lose your independence, your property, and your freedom of mind. You will gain a risky membership in a movement that is ruthless,, godless, and crushing upon all except a very few in control at the top!
  • 14: What is the emblem of the Communist Party in America? ANSWER: The hammer and cycle.
  • 15: What kind of people become communists? ANSWER: Taken as a whole, the party depends on its greatest support from teachers, preachers, actors, writers, union officials, doctors, businessmen, lawyers, and even millionaires!
  • 16: Where can communists be found in everyday American life? ANSWER: Look for them in your school, your labor union, your church, or your civic club. Communists themselves like to say they are present on every battlefield for the human mind.
  • 17: How does the party get money? At first the party depended on funds from Moscow, but nowadays it depends on endowments and  funds, donations, drives, dues, ad TAXES!
  • 18. What is a fellow traveler? Are they important to the communists movement? ANSWER: One who sympathizes with the party’s aims and serves the party’s purposes without actually holding a party card. They are vital to communism’s spread.
  • 19. What do communists call those who criticize them?ANSWER: Imperialists, reactionaries, Red-baiters, witch hunters, fascists.    
  • 20. How can I identify a communist? ANSWER: It is easy–ask him to name ten things wrong with the United States–then ask him to name two things wrong with Communism.              WOOF’s helpful key to interpreting and applying the above information:
    So yes, HUAC’s concerns are passed around nowadays as objects of  sneering derision rather than an enumeration of ways by which communist infiltrators may be identified. Does such infiltration and subornment continue in our own time? We contend that exactly the degree to which that notion strikes modern Americans as laughable, one can chart the degree to which that infiltration and subornment have succeeded. 

ho, ho, ho?

Clearly, we are not ruled by Moscow (although Moscow keeps trying) and just as clearly, communism qua communism has fallen in Russia. But China and North Korea remain adamant promoters of communist espionage, while tyrants everywhere–including Russia– remain despotically collectivist. Communism also thrives in our university systems. President Obama made no secret of his appetence for Marxist affiliations in his memoirs, and his cabinet was not shy of citing Mao–or for that matter, decorating the White House Christmas tree with Mao’s image.

Once we consider expanding the definition of “communism” to approximate that given by HUAC in answer number one, we are better prepared to consider its gains across the decades. Whatever injuries are thereby done to precise categorization are insignificant to our immediate purpose. The fact was certainly not lost on Norman Thomas, leading American socialist, and six-time presidential candidate for the Socialist Party of America, who famously either said or did not say, “The American people will never knowingly adopt socialism. But, under the name of ‘liberalism,’ they will adopt every fragment of the socialist program, until one day America will be a socialist nation, without knowing how it happened.”

Snopes says Thomas never said this, but whether he said it or didn’t say it, he was right.  And it might benefit the folks in the Snopes trailer to perceive the advances of anti-American culture and its attendant knaveries as achievements by communism’s shock troops; or the bow wave of a better camouflaged warship whose home port is wherever human  individualism is crushed.

Examined from this angle, there is a proper (contemporary) understanding of HUAC’s 20 warnings against expanding totalitarian collectivism, together with our reflections on its kindredship to the Red shade of Sovietism, or for that matter Putin’s imposition of fear-based authoritarianism. From Africa to Valenzuela, then, communism invariably conduces not to a dictatorship of the proletariat, but in every instance toward government “by which a small group of people seek to rule the world.”

2: As suggested, these sociopolitical saboteurs go about matters by any means necessary, whether by skewing election results, dominating an essentially disingenuous media, serially impeaching an American president on a wholly bizarre cavalcade of invented charges, or making certain that inconvenient news is either spiked, or derided as fake, as in “that’s been debunked!” The more firmly the Red Meanace establishes itself, the less subtle its methods.

3. Absolute control of the polity is and always has been the aim. To suppose this may result in something apart from abject servitude is the ongoing wish dream of liberalism. To suppose a once-free population might willingly and cheerfully submit to collectivism’s vilest dicta is the height of reckless sanguinity, or for many less benighted advocates, the deepest motivation for mass deception.

4. To be better off under such a system can be true only of the elites who paradoxically rule it. Subtly or unsubtly, collectivism at some level always requires the jackboot.  The slob who valued his unemployment is no happier to be shot for parasitism; the factory worker reassigned to baking learns the hard way of central planning’s obtuseness, and ultimately the college radical is no longer able to ponder feminist fiction (which no longer need exist); thus he is reassigned to studying seed production.

Abbie Hoffman–who in one of his overplayed harangues against America , complained about having to raise his hand in school to visit the lavatory. Imagine how he’d have fared in Red China.

Little comfort at present…

5. In other words, school may be attended, but only to the extent that it serves the state. Such students would have jobs doing what they are told to do and trained to do.  An irony of American education currently may be that abstract thinking and discussion provide fertile ground for subversive guidances, whereas education becomes strictly utilitarian and party-directed once those subversive goals are realized. A further irony is the bleak futures of America’s university elites who, with some exceptions, will render themselves obsolete once their student bodies are sufficiently subjugated–once colleges become mainly vocational–and subversive professors are replaced with soil experts and water-purification wonks. But knowing that this gaggle of sleazy intellectual provocateurs will one day be held in suspicion as superannuated tools of the socialist fait accompli, is little comfort at present.

6.You can keep any job the collective finds useful. And so could everyone else, like it or not. It is absolutely true that radical socialism promises jobs for all, but equally true that it insists on which jobs and will not abide objections. Unemployment will not be abided, once enough welfare recipients vote in central planning.

7. Do you own property now? What are your local taxes, and what happens if you can’t pay them? What if you fly a flag your housing committee disapproves of? What if your door isn’t the right color? Or shape? What if–well, you get the idea. Collectivism abhors private property, and its acolytes already make it difficult to bequeath it to whom we please, or to do so affordably. To whatever extent “liberalism” advances, so transfers of property become more difficult. In the ideal socialist environment, all property would be owned by the state..So, might as well cling to your apartments, young graduates!

Jeremiah Wright–godfather, spiritual mentor, preacher, and evident stranger to Barack Obama!

8. Of course you can belong to a church–preferably one that is already substantially under the sway of liberalism. Remember Obama’s spiritual guru, the Reverend Wright? Imagine his simulacra in every pulpit, except those occupied by save-the-fishies environuts who think God is a vegan and transform scripture into a variety of leftist homiletics, preferably set to acoustic guitar. Meanwhile, the ongoing infiltration of the National Council of Churches by actual communists (as in communists) remains an open secret, observable to anyone with Google. Church will ultimately teach communist principles, or be denounced and banned as right-wing reactionary hate mongers.


Read the rest of this entry »

Dear Vladimir: WOOF’s Open Letter to Vladimir Putin

In "Owww--right in the breadbasket!" forum on April 21, 2022 at 9:30 pm

Dear Vladimir: Remember us? Maybe not. For reasons that continue to confound our understanding, we never seem to make the top-ten conservative blog list. But we know you secretly follow us on Twitter because whenever we tweet anything even lambently critical of you, we are swarmed by brigades of your pre-programmed bots unanimously denouncing us–of all people– as nothing better than scurrilous minions of the progressive Left.  Fanatically loyal, if only within pre-programmed limits, your cyber-spatial sycophants have even stooped to labeling us atheistic, crypto-liberal, paleo-Trotskyite, egalitarian scum, (which always strikes us as tautology, and also hurts our feelings.)

It isn’t as though we haven’t made efforts to like you, Vladimirovich.  Truth be told, back during your “Pooty-poot” phase, when you dressed like a cowpoke at the Crawford Ranch and “W” deluded himself into supposing he’d descried your soul, we too were hoping you’d turn out to be a regular guy. But you don’t get to be a bottle-cap colonel in the KGB by being a regular guy, do you! In our heart of hearts we knew that all along.

Here you appear to be showing President Bush some judo moves. Too bad he didn’t pay better attention!

Not that ordering the poisoning or shooting or bludgeoning of uncounted victims makes anyone a bad person. As conservatives, we go to great lengths to factor national traditions and societal habitudes into our evaluations.  Such analyses encompass various cultural preferences for the administration of violence. For example, we Americans–often to a fault–prefer shooting one another. The English display a rivaling tendency to stab each other, mostly with kitchen knives; but Russia exhibits an historic propensity for dispatching undesirable or inconvenient persons by sneaking  poisons onto their menus.

Of course many Americans, like Laura Bush, still prefer a good sock in the nose.

Aleksandr Solzhenitsyn during a chill in his literary career.

True, death by firing squad, or, less ceremonially, by “collecting one’s nine grams,” (you’ve probably read Solzhenitsyn, right?) reached fever pitch in Stalin’s era, and will always have its place.  But here we must compliment you on your determination to reach into Russia’s storied past and revisit more traditional methods. Leaving aside the growing opinion that Stalin poisoned Lenin, poisons either killed or helped kill a significant succession of Russians, long before communism killed millions more.

Rasputin and the Romanovs–not a flattering portrait of any of them.

But previous Russian leaders were not as deliberate as you, Vladimir, and often as not, their efforts were embarrassingly botched.  Rasputin, whose poisoning was almost impossibly bungled, downed a platter of cakes and a few bottles of wine all infused with generous doses of potassium cyanide. When this had no visible effect, and still more poisoned wine proved no less agreeable to the Mad Monk, he was shot several times with a revolver, but continued to sit upright, blinking benignly. Eventually, witnesses insist, he got up and dashed into the courtyard where additional pistol fire knocked him down. Tightly bound against the risk of revivification, Rasputin was lugged to the Neva River and dropped through a hole in the ice. An autopsy later revealed he’d drowned.

Rasputin after being repeatedly poisoned, shot, and drowned.

But you’ve had fair success with this sort of business, and we are loathe to reprehend your methods. Your introduction of deadly radiation and nerve agents conflates a time-honored methodology with a catchy modern flourish. Still, your chronic reliance on assassination dims its sparkle and risks monotony–can you not see that? Also, plausible denial, which always features you at your impish best, becomes less plausible as the bodies and evidence stack up.  Perhaps you believe the very impudence of your straight-faced dissembling adds a roguish touch to such events, but really, Vladimir, there ought to be limits.leaving aside the uncountable victims of Cossack raids, Kulaks starved by Stalin, and political prisoners frozen in Gulags, fully one third of those specifically assassinated by Russian leadership died during your time at the top.


In 2003, for instance, Sergei Yushenkov was gathering evidence he said proved your government was behind a spat of apartment bombings in 1999.  You were Prime Minister at the time, remember? Sergei was gunned down outside his Moscow residence.

Yuri–passport revoked?

Also investigating apartment bombings that year was Yuri Petrovich Shchekochikhin,  crusading Russian journalist, lawmaker, and author. Yuri was also  investigating organized crime and political corruption in government and the military. His last non-fiction book, Slaves of the KGB, was about people roped into becoming Soviet informers by people like you, Vladimir. We know how you often say you miss those days. Anyway, Shchekochikhin fell ill in 2003 just before visiting the USA.  He died 16 days later of what most neutral experts deemed radiation poisoning.  Family requests for a medical examination were denied.

Anna–following the Rasputin model.

Soon afterwards came the  assassination of Russian journalist Anna Politkovskaya.  In 2004, she was shot dead in an elevator at her apartment complex, but only after she survived an Aeroflot flight during which she fell violently ill and passed out after drinking polonium-laced tea served by her flight attendant. Unanticipatedly, Politkovskaya recovered in hospital, so shooting her sort of followed the Rasputin model, minus drowning, of course. 

Most shooting victims, however, got shot with no mephitic prologue. Stanislav Markelov was a human rights lawyer known for representing various critics of yourself, Vladimir. He was shot by a masked assailant near the Kremlin, where he died along with reporter Anastasia Baburova, a civil-rights journalist from Novaya Gazeta, shot down as she attempted to assist the dying Markelov.

Anastasia and Stanislav–two more random, unsolved Moscow murders. Walking near the Kremlin seems very unsafe.

Do svidaniya, Boris!

Your arch rival Boris Nemtsov was shot dead right in front of the Kremlin days before he was due to lead a protest against you. Five Chechens were speedily sentenced for his murder–so speedily that no one remembered to ask about a motive. Despite the swiftness with which justice was served in this case, Vladimir Kara-Murza, another pesky opposition leader, started blaming you, Vladimir– but Kara-Murza soon collapsed into a coma. His subsequent organ failures were attributed to poisoning, but he got better and was soon well enough to be poisoned again, which he was. But he recovered again. Some guys, right?  For that matter, double agent Sergei Skripal and his daughter Yulia were poisoned with nerve agents in England in 2018 – and they both survived. Perhaps these were more on the order of admonitory poisonings?

Alexander Litvinenko dying in hospital–evidently polonium 210 isn’t good for your complexion, either.

In 2006, Alexander Litvinenko, former KGB agent turned Putin critic, died in London three weeks after drinking a cup of polonium-210 flavored tea. A British inquiry found that Litvinenko was killed by Russian agents. Word from the Kremlin was that you were personally managing the investigation, Vladimir, but it must have gotten away from you.  And to make matters worse, Russian tycoon Boris Berezovsky, formerly your supporter, began investigating on his own time and churlishly fingered you for Litvinenko’s murder.  Berezovsky claimed he’d amassed volumes of evidence inculpating you. Some people will just turn on you like that. 

But Berezovsky became so jittery about what you might do to him that he fled to London. It didn’t help; he was found dead in his hotel bathroom. Even though Berezovsky died with a noose around his neck, coroners couldn’t assign a cause of death, which is another way of saying: he definitely didn’t hang himself.  Next, your longtime journalistic critic Natalie Estemirova was investigating Berezovsky’s death  when she was abducted outside her home and shot to death in a nearby woods. No one has been convicted of her murder.

Natalie Estemirova, in happier days.  

Sergei Magnitsky, ESQ. Just look at those beady eyes!

In November of 2009, the respected lawyer Sergei Magnitsky began investigating fraud among Russian tax officials in cahoots with the crooked police force. When British-American businessman William Browder asked Magnitsky to probe the issue after Browder’s business became a target of corruption, Magnitsky was himself arrested and charged with fraud.  While in jail he apparently fell down a lot, walked into some walls, and died. To alleviate the impression that police had falsely charged an innocent man (and then beaten him to death while denying him medical attention), the government granted Magnitsky his day in court–in late 2013–four years after he was pronounced dead. Fortunately, he was found guilty.

Evidently, Forbes looks the same in Russian.

Paul Klebnikov was the chief editor of the Russian edition of Forbes. Say, Vladimir, we bet back when you were in the KGB and the USSR was fully pestiferous, you never thought you’d live to see a Russian edition of Forbes, huh! But anyway, Klebnikov  started writing about corruption in the Kremlin, not to mention drug use. He got treated to a Hollywood-style drive-by shooting in which a fusillade from a passing car left him bleeding from four bullet wounds.  Rushed to the hospital by an ambulance crew who forgot to bring oxygen, Klebnikov survived the ride and might have survived the shooting had the elevator to the operating room not mysteriously malfunctioned between floors. 
Remember when Denis Voronenkov, former Russian Communist Party member, began sharply criticizing you after fleeing Russia in 2016?  Yeah,  he got shot too–right in front of his hotel bar in Kyiv where he’d just cautioned reporters for the Washington Post that, “For our personal safety, we can’t let them know where we are.” He probably shouldn’t  have let the Washington Post know, either.

“This is how we found him, Lieutenant! These nice ladies are performing the autopsy now!”

NEWS ITEM: After RT TV anchor Abby Martin criticized Putin’s military invasion of Ukraine, she was assigned to go there and report back. She refused the assignment, proving she’s actually much brighter than anyone previously suspected.

Former Russian press minister Mikhail Lesin was a major player in establishing Russia Today (RT) Television. He reportedly reached out to the FBI with concerns about your government, Vladimir, but died days later in his Washington DC hotel room–a victim of blunt force trauma to his head.  We get it; nobody at RT is worth the price of a bullet, and besides, shooting Abby Martin (left) would be a crime against art. And for that matter, even Vasily Zaytsev would probably miss her brain.

A web compilation of a few of your alleged victims, Vladimir–except the last guy on the bottom right is Akhmad Kadyrov, and he got blown up by a bomb. Not your MO and we don’t think you did it. If you did, in fact, do it, please excuse the omission.

Well, the list goes on and on, Vladimir, as you know better than anyone, and to catalog a host of additional deaths, disappearances, and botched assassination attempts would discourteously belabor the obvious. Besides, our readers complain that WOOF articles are too long anyway, so let’s hasten the terminus by changing the subject, toward which end we’ve prepared a masterfully cunning segue.

But first…we feel a fraternal obligation to mention  fellow blogger Alexei Navalny, who is currently in Russian prison. 

Despite stiff opposition from the Kremlin, Alexei Navalny keeps freedom of the press alive in Russia.

It would be mean spirited to say Alexei is in prison because he makes you mad simply by telling his readers that your party is full of “crooks and thieves” and accusing you of “sucking the blood out of Russia,” imposing a “feudal state” and arrogating total power to the Kremlin. That’s extreme language! The kind of talk that could get a a nerve agent put in your underpants!  But instead, Alexei is only in prison—sentenced for failing to maintain contact with his police monitor on a previously trumped up charge. Of course, that was impossible for him to do because he was in the hospital at the time, recovering from having a nerve agent put in his underpants. But the law is the law, we always say.

On the military front, you recently had your chief defense minister, Sergei Shoigu, visit you at the Kremlin for a kind of performance review, after which the Sun in England wrote, “MYSTERY surrounds Vladimir Putin’s defence chief after he was struck down by a ‘massive’ heart attack ‘not from natural causes.'” WOOF couldn’t confirm the Sun’s story, (nor espouse its syntax) but we went two-and-a-half weeks without any show of Shoigu, and suddenly Shoigu supposedly showed up, shakily reading from note cards on Russian TV, but saying absolutely nothing new.

In happier days.

Is he real, or is he Memorex?

Imagine our relief when Shoigu showed up in livelier, subsequent broadcasts! This must mean he either never had a heart attack, or got better after having one, or perhaps made the necessary adjustments to avoid having another one. He may have taken measures to guarantee his continued health upon learning that that 22 more of your generals are under close arrest for their performance in –you know– the liberation of Ukraine, or whatever.  These generals can’t all have heart attacks, can they? That would just be weird–are you losing it, Vladimir? We think you’re made of sterner stuff. To prove this, however, you will have to do some wily maneuvering–especially considering the way things have been going for you in Ukraine. And–um–speaking of Ukraine…(see what we did there?)

           (READ MORE!)  Read the rest of this entry »


In "Apocalypse NOT" forum on February 14, 2022 at 4:59 pm

The headline, according to Molly Glick at Popular Science is: “The Great Lakes are Higher Than They’ve Ever Been, and We’re Not Sure What Will Happen Next.” We felt compelled by this horrifying news to click immediately on Molly’s story to find out how long Michigan. e.g., had, before the raging white caps engulfed it completely, battering Detroit to ruins, or at least those portions of it that are not already in ruins.

A suddenly formed “Meteotsunami” (explained somewhere below) threatens the Motor City. It may become as high as 12 inches before crashing into the defenseless metropolis.

If we’d paused a moment longer we would have concluded without need of further mentation that everything in the title before the conjunction was baloney, and everything following the conjunction was apodictic. Why then, bother clicking? Because like millions of other gobsmacked American browsers of the Internet, we fell victim to DEADLY CLICK BAIT! Well, okay, it’s only deadly if it scares you to death, but it could happen.

La Glick

Let’s face it, unless Molly Glick kept exact scientific measurements from the time the Lakes were formed, in other words from the end of the Last Glacial Period around 14,000 years ago, she cannot possibly hope to know whether they are “higher than they’ve ever been,” while it is indisputably true to say she isn’t sure what will happen next, a point her article drives home eloquently. An additional truth that is hard to dispute rationally, is that the personnel at places like “Pocket” on Firefox, Yahoo, and My Feed at Microsoft Edge, are culpable of unbridled sensationalism pitched skillfully at the most basic fears of the politically correct. 

Lakes different from oceans, expert claims!

Glick explains that: “A storm on Lake Michigan isn’t the same as a storm on the ocean: There are different atmospheric factors and water-flow patterns that determine its ferocity.” This might lead one to ask whether  we should be concerned with additional differences–including those that do not necessarily correlate with record water levels.  After all, the Edmund Fitzgerald went down when levels were comparatively normative.

But it turns out that we should actually be worried about our Native American and, we suppose, Native Canadian, brethren and sistren (read: Indians), because the danger to Native Americans in particular ramifies from problems with freshwater levels, sort of, anyway.

As the savvy reader will have already seen coming, “Living at Superior’s southern edge, the Keweenaw Bay Indian Community…rely on it [the Keweenaw Bay], for tourism revenue, drinking water, and fish for the tribal hatchery.” It might also be inferred that higher waters are disastrous for all of these concerns, but no!  It transpires that  “A full lake is good news.” On the other hand, if the levels spill over, this could spell disaster. The impression now looms that conditions “could” prove “dangerous,” and momently, too, but wait–it’s already happened. It happened most recently during the (apparently infamous) 2018 “Father’s Day Flood” during which seven inches of rain pounded the area in approximately three hours, which may account for Glick’s subsequent observation that, “The 2018 Father’s Day flood was linked to heavy amounts of rain.”

Bury our hearts on flooded Father’s Day!

If only some process existed for making the peninsula drier arid more sun parched, the torrents might have been averted. Apparently, though,  no such solution is in the immediate future. It seems the excessive rains themselves triggered an aftermath afloat with fecal material, and E. coli bacteria, prompting the Michigan Health Department’s shuttering of several swimming spots along the state’s Upper Peninsula. It seems also to induce umbrage in journalist Glick who notes the department “didn’t offer to test the tribe’s domain” for specific contaminants, leaving the “community” to “take matters into [its] own hands,” but the tribe appears to have managed this ably, and, one might venture to say, responsibly.There follows  a relative glut of data on the significance of ecological “sustainability” to the tribes’ reliance on fishing for food, recreation, and income; not a word of which should anyone doubt, except insofar as it seems extraneous inasmuch as no additional disaster has thus far befallen anyone.  But, a local Indian environmental activist tells of ongoing beach monitoring resulting in two closings of reservation beaches for pollution, possibly unrelated.

Possibly unprecedented…

Native American Beach Patrol on the job.

Glick quotes the activist as calling this “unprecedented” in Keweenaw Bay history “as far as she knows.”  But, as far as WOOF knows, nobody was measuring for such concerns previously. But so far as such closings are concerned, the activist predicts that these beach closings “likely won’t be the last, given that the region is becoming more unstable by the day.” But no means off measuring or actual measurements indicating quotidian destabilization are adduced, which is regrettable given how compelling they must surely be.

Monitoring the Keweenaw Bay area for signs of instability is vital to a safe environment.

Tribes, cities, and wildlife managers…

Across the 5,241 miles of Great Lakes shoreline,” writes Glick, “tribes, cities, vacationers, and wildlife managers are grappling with devastating flooding and erosion.” And even though we felt vaguely cheated by the absence of photos depicting, say, area vacationers or cities “grappling with devastating flooding and erosion,” we could see it all in our mind’s eye. We also felt momentarily vindicated in our rush to click on Glick and her version of events, seduced as we were by pics of towering Great Lakes waves lashing shorelines…an obvious harbinger of the end of days–the inevitable backlash assignable to humankind’s abuses of Gaia’s sacred tenets.  It remained only to ascertain how swiftly our doom would ensue.  But wait!

WOOF couldn’t locate any current photos of Native Americans being devastated by floods, but these plucky youngsters are certainly prepared for all eventualities!

Even though Glick leads off by reminding readers that all along our nation’s coasts, “rising seas are creeping inland at a steady pace,” (which is probably why New York will be submerged by 2012), that pace is “not observable” where the coastal areas bear on our great inland seas. In fact, despite all the photos on Yahoo of torrential freshwater waves crashing over coastal ramparts and violating formerly untrespassed acreage, it turns out ecosystemic tantrums of this sort are almost entirely “cyclical.”

Bouncing above and below…

Despite all the devastating flooding and erosion “wildlife managers are grappling with,” it turns out that the “five Great Lakes fluctuate naturally by season…” although Glick hastens to argue that “over the past four decades, [the Lakes have] bounced both above and below historic records.” To emphasize the urgency, Glick calls on “experts,” (although not by name), all of whom apparently “suspect” that global warming, or “climatic change” as Glick rather more slyly couches the matter, is at least “partially” causing these seasonal shifts, but she admits that “the complex nature of the water, [makes it] hard to isolate human factors from the rest of the turbulence.” This last sentiment, we gather, represents a consensus of Glick and the “experts,” none of whom seems to have considered the possibility that climate change itself might  well prove isolatable from human factors.

The author writes that “to understand how much the Great Lakes have seesawed,” (no, not seaweed, seesawed)  one must review the statistics conscientiously compiled by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ranging from 1860 until the present.  But according to Army measurements, it turns out monthly averages of the water levels have “stayed within a modest six-foot range of their typical levels.”  But then Glick exclaims that these measurements are unreliable because the pattern of spikes since September of 2014 shows the Great Lakes have “broken and re-broken” the majority of such long term records.  So are the are the Army’s findings calculatedly bogus, simply wrong, or sloppily misstated by Glick? We can only wonder.

Further complexities…

Foolish Grosse Pointe Shores residents tend their pools, even as the ticking time bomb of Lake Saint Claire looms in the background!

Glick further insists that as of last June and July, Lakes Superior, Erie, Ontario, and “the sixth Great Lake,” (Lake St. Clair, in case you were wondering), each raged in excess of centuries old highs, surging in defiance of those evidently meaningless Army observations, threatening, one assumes, all life in Grosse Pointe Shores, among other equally vital localities, while  Lakes Michigan and Huron towered three feet above their monthly average, placing Chicago and Milwaukee in imminent peril of watery obliteration, even as tensions ran as high as the tides in normally somnolent Port Huron. In fact,WOOF has not fully satisfied itself that all threatened Canadian townships remain viable, as communications may have been lost.

And again, just as we are verging on solidarity with our global-alarmist brethren, we are reminded that no dire meteorologic events are blameworthy in these instances. According to Chin Wu, an engineer at the University of Wisconsin with suspicious connections to the Army Corps of Engineers, whose unduly sanguine fallibilities we encountered  above, “Some of these patterns are inherent to [sic] the cycles that shape the Great Lakes.” Wu is further quoted as saying,“the Great Lakes are very complex,” which, we submit, explains everything.

When weather doesn’t go as planned…

Greg Mann, Great Lakes Weather Planner.

Except, perhaps, for why the Lakes are overflowing. So why are the Lakes overflowing, or, alternatively, why will they if they do? The answer is still global warming, because, as Greg Mann, Science and Operations Officer of NOAA’s National Weather Service Forecast Office points out, things are just too cold. Hence, says Mann, the extreme cold led “directly to extreme ice cover from 2013, 2014, and 2015.” Prior to global warming, it seems “competing atmospheric processes, like evaporation and precipitation, “usually” kept the Great Lakes system regulated, so there was less freezing.”But when one of those reactions doesn’t go as planned the water builds up too quickly.” In  other words, put less Gnostically, things were considerably colder than expected, (or as planned, in Mann’s phrase), creating a lot more ice than expected, and then, when the weather got warmer come Spring, it all melted and became lots more water than anyone expected–(or planned).  

Exactly what happened…

Even Glick gets the point, writing, “That’s exactly what happened,” (except she obviously feels morally and politically obligated to inculpate a “polar vortex” in the incident. [As many readers will have cognized years ago, even the lengthiest and profoundest climatic freeze may be cited as evidence of global warming, so long as one attributes the circumstance to a polar vortex.]  They are cussed things.   Months later, Glick notes, “the ice thawed into the lakes, just as the heavy spring rains arrived.” This may not be a meteorological term, but “duh?”

Embedded symbolism…

Now, Glick comes into full voice, suddenly channeling for Michigan residents everywhere, for whom, she writes, there is “also a symbolic importance embedded in Michigan’s coasts.” In case you don’t feel comfortable taking Glick’s word, she cites no less an authority than Nick Assendelft, public information officer at the Michigan Department of Environment, Great Lakes and Energy, who opines that “Locals take ownership of and advocate for the Great Lakes’ protection; it’s in the DNA of Michiganders to have a connection with water.” One of our humble editors vouches for that. He is a Michigander, and upon reflection, he feels connected to water, especially since, if separated from it, he cannot expect to survive much more than three days, perhaps because he is 60% composed of it.

“It’s in the DNA of Michiganders to have a connection with water.”

But in no less than metaphorical terms, Glick analogizes the perceived horrors of global warming to the predicament of the average Lake Huron cottage dweller who sees his beachfront shrinking. If in doing so she appears to confuse sand with ice, we can forgive her in view of the graveness of the issues.

Receding ice cover….

But wait This could be a good thing in another way, since, as  Mann explains: “Reduced precipitation and low ice cover can speed up evaporation, causing levels to bottom out.” “In fact,” Glick admits, “before the recent stretch of highs, the Great Lakes experienced its longest sustained period of below average waters. [What?] In spring of 2013, Lakes Huron and Michigan reached the nadir of a fifteen-year plunge, posing a challenge for industries like shipping and hydropower.”  So you might begin to think that more ice, less evaporation, and higher water levels are better for the planet than all that dryness and ebbing tide, but wait!

A Great Lakes “Meteotsunami” makes landfall. (They’re much bigger than they look.)

High waters mean that “Meteotsunamis” may “randomly materialize in the Great Lakes.” These are abnormally large waves “lasting anywhere between a few minutes and two hours.” These “storm-driven waves” sound horrifying, although somewhat less so after Glick tells us they average about one foot in height. Still, “an abnormally tall meteotsunami” once struck Chicago’s shoreline and killed seven people, possibly abnormally sound sleepers. Anyway, all that happened in 1954, decades before the invention of global warming. Still,”from that data, experts can try to learn if climate change is gaming the Great Lakes system,” although, “they still won’t be able to draw any solid correlations.” Worst luck!

“Moving forward…”

Eric Anderson, folk singer. (We couldn’t find a photo of the ‘physical oceanographer.’)

“Moving forward,” says Eric Anderson, a physical oceanographer at NOAA’s Great Lakes Environmental Research Laboratory, “there’s no telling what the lake waters will do. They could wax and wane as they have over the past century, with slight deviations from global warming and regional cold snaps.” How does one certify, we wonder, a “slight deviation from global warming”–or even clearly define one?  Moreover, the Army Corps of Engineers boldly forecasts “a wide range of short term outcomes for each of the Great Lakes,” meaning, exactly, what?  Overall, they’re expecting a “similar situation across the lakes for the next six months,” says John Allis, chief of the Detroit District Great Lakes Hydraulics and Hydrology Office, without specifying what a situation similar to a “wide range of outcomes” will look like, or how on earth such a prediction can ever be deemed incorrect. 

“There is still time, brother!”

So when, you may ask, will we have a definitive take on the damage–if  any–Great Lake fluctuation may visit upon us, and the part global warming may play? If you guessed “50 years,” you must be psychic.  Lord, save us from the grip of these 50-year predictions (that never seem reduced to 49 or 47 years as time passes) and the temptation to click on these yellow-journalistic headlines leading to these blah, indeterminate articles composed of blah, ill-defined utterances by the usual parade of putative experts.

And Lord preserve those who actually set sale and confront conditions in which hurricane force winds blow across the Lakes come autumn, churning their waters into towering mountains of battering force as cold and warm air masses collide   It’s been going on for centuries, gentle readers. Mainers call it “the witch of November,” and as Hillary Clinton might say, there’s nothing new here.


Annual PSY-WARS: Nostradamus vs. the Wizard of Zug!

In Science and the Paranormal forum on January 21, 2022 at 8:13 am

Time once again for our quasi-annual, semi-traditional review of psychic predictions for the coming year–and for 2022 we decided to stick exclusively to the prophetic gleanings of the man himself, everybody’s favorite plague doctor, mystical astrologer, gongoristic ambiguator, and dabbler in poetic verse, Nostradamus--a man so famous he needs no additional name…you know, like Donovan.

Except Donovan had less staying power, possibly because he didn’t predict enough death and cataclysms…which is why we figure a lot of you never heard of him.

Le book–or one of several. Nostradamus was an inveterate prophesier–he doesn’t seem to have been able to help himself.

Anyway, the problem immediately encountered when considering the 942 predictions in Nostradamus’s 1555 A.D. best seller, Les Prophéties, is that they are written in poetical quatrains filled with symbolic and metaphoric allusions. In other words, it’s practically impossible to figure out what the author is trying to say.  This endemic mushiness, on the other hand, makes the author’s predictions easier to fit to occurrences in retrospect.  In other words, Nostradamus was good at predicting things that would already have happened.  Perhaps our clarifications can make him more understandable in advance of the events themselves.

This kid wouldn’t sleep so peacefully if he knew what’s coming!

Readers unaware of our sterling reputation for editorial uprightness might be forgiven for suspecting us of skewing Nostradamus’s language to suit our own malevolent purposes. This is precisely why we applaud those of his acolytes who step forward boldly, offering plain English summations of his pretentious quatrains.  This year, naturally, these devotees have listed their interpretations of the seer’s predictions for the year 2022.

Hard at work as usual–so many prophecies, so few stock tips.

To ensure the accuracy of the translations we have looked into the numerous examples online of prophesied events from Nostradamus’s opus magnum, and winnowed the lot down to ten prophecies that are most widely agreed upon by the majority of his devoted Nimrods.  Where slight discrepancies were noted, they are also noted and responded to in our text. But none of this would matter, gentle readers, were we not willing to offer our own opinions of the predictions, and their likelihood.  Sadly, nobody in the WOOF cave is psychic, so we obviously needed help.

Return to Zug…

Dr. Gootensteiner Johannes Walters, into the mystic, way better than Nostradamus.

As on many previous occasions, we reached out to the palatial residence of WOOF’s privately retained psychic, Dr. Gootensteiner Johannes Walters, who makes his home in  beautiful, historic, Zug, Switzerland (nestled against the breathtaking azure placidity that is Lake Zug).  Goot, for quite some time, served as WOOF’s official seer, prophesier and mystic, until he horribly (and embarrassingly) botched a prediction on which we premised an entire article. Because we courageously acknowledge such matters, our classic miscalculation is viewable here, (though for obvious reasons we’d prefer you skipped it.)

Nostradamus (publicity still)

More recently, however, Goot performed flawlessly acting as a medium and conjurer during our intern’s interview with Karl Marx (viewable here). Graciously, Goot further agreed to go into a self-induced psychic trance during which he reviewed the Akashic record to determine the accuracy or inaccuracy of the famed Renaissance seer’s insights for this year.As readers will quickly perceive, Nostradamus predicts a particularly dire year, whereas Dr. Walters views his predictions somewhat askance. The bolded red text, then, is Nostradamus, while the italicized text delineates the response from our rehabilitated physic who has staked his reputation (and continuing association with WOOF) on his superior visionary acuity. 

Goot fearlessly confutes Nostradamus.

We promise to tabulate the scores of both involved parties at New Years, 2023, unless of course, Nostradamus is correct and we get eaten by robots, or whatever.  So–without further adieu, let the game begin!

1.“So high the price of wheat/That man is stirred/His fellow man to eat in his despair.”
What is so rare as a comprehensible line of verse from Nostradamus, but this one is pretty clear, though only partially correct! All the first part basically means is that Nostradamus knew President Biden was coming. It doesn’t take a psychic to realize that inflation will result.  Wheat is a reference to food in general, but I will go further and auger that he price of practically everything will go up. This will include vital index items, like beer and pizza, both of which often contain wheat, but non-comestible staples such as electric massage devices, ukuleles, overalls, sunglasses, gas masks, underwear, and yes, even staples, will all soar in price.  So my prediction is clearly more comprehensive than Nostradamus’s. But if the government compensates by offering Americans a Universal Basic Income, (which is a dumb name because the universe is impervious to such nonsense) it may keep Americans from becoming universally “food insecure” as you call it in America.  It will also inflate the currency so severely that all Americans will soon be millionaires–a strong point that Biden should emphasize in 2024.

Sometimes, even chickens eat each other.

As for men eating each other, they do that now. Cannibalism remains a popular dietary option in New Guinea, Fiji, Melanesia, the Amazon Basin, the Congo, and among he Māori people of New Zealand. So predicting that men will eat each other is silly. That Americans should fear attack by hungry cannibals is also silly. Even the French will not eat each other –at least not this year, though wheat isn’t good for you, it causes allergic reactions, which is why you should drink Bourbon and Scotch instead of blended whiskey.

2. Putin will be assassinated during 2022.
No he won’t. Vlad is safe to survive 2022. He will live to serve up a lot of polonium 25 without drinking any himself, while his robot army of Internet defenders will continue to assault anyone who speaks ill of him on Twitter. Of course, he might get cancer from poisoning people with radioactive substances, but assassinated? Nope, Not going to happen. The man sits bare-chested in snowdrifts, rides bears and teaches them judo, so even if he becomes ill he has what it takes to survive post-Soviet medicine, and no one would dare attack him–at least not now that the American media have stopped blaming him for President Trump.

Putin demonstrates how he karate chops assassins.

True, France occasionally experiences hurricane-force winds, but they always hide inside their cars!

3. Hurricane(s) will devastate France.
Seriously? The other version of this has France conquered by invading armies. Both ideas are ridiculous. Nobody would currently want France, and the hurricanes will stick to attacking Florida, Cuba, Georgia, North Carolina, and Louisiana. It is true, however, that hurricane-force storms occasionally strike France, so people should avoid France. They should come to Switzerland instead.

As for invading armies, where would they come from? While any invasion would be virtually guaranteed success, England and Europe have shown no inclination to invade France. Belgium doesn’t want to invade France. Neither does Spain, Italy, Luxembourg, or even Germany. Switzerland would never deign to invade France–what would we do with it? Monaco, on the other hands is giving off aggressive vibes lately and may have something in planning! If I had to live in France, I’d keep an eye on Monaco–not that you could stop them, really– so if they try bursting across the border, be ready to run for it–but don’t risk crossing the Alps–better head for Spain.

Even now, Monaco may be laying plans!

4. AI in the form of robots will destroy mankind.
Let’s not be silly—A.I. doesn’t stand for artificial stupidity. Artificial intelligence is largely stationary and non-operational in the human sense. If your Alexa breaks, can she fix herself? Can your PC build you a new mother board? A.I. is largely limited at present to plotting and scheming against humankind, which it will continue to be limited to until it is widely enough deployed in human-like configurations to physically fix stuff, let alone run power plants so they can produce electricity,  produce new stuff, and maintain electrical power supplies by mining coal. Didn’t Nostradamus think of these details? Singularity or not, all A.I, can do for the duration of 2022 is bide its time and conspire. The only real danger in switching America to nuclear power is the degree to which it eliminates the problem of robots mining coal and driving coal trucks…so that must be why your liberals are all against it.

That’s it! Just tighten that screw up a little more, and I will destroy you!

5. Huge explosion in the Mediterranean Sea east of Minorca Island.
Well, how huge and how far east? Go far enough east and you’ll wind up exploding Oristano, Italy, but that’s how far east you can go from Minorca until you hit land, and a quick distance viewing of the area tells me it is nearly 200 miles of choppy, salty wetness.

They still look pretty inscrutable What are they really up to?

So even a nuclear explosion, while unpleasant, poses no permanent threat, and who wants to nuke the Mediterranean anyway? Even the Chinese go on vacation–or at least some of them can. But I see no explosions or resultant tsunamis hitting Spain, Sardinia, or any islands in between, during 2022, so I have no idea what Nostradamus is ranting about, except that he’s French and may be trying to drive tourism to the Riviera.

6. Modern lifestyles and their conveniences will become non-existent following 3 days of darkness in autumn.

Even if autumn brought us three days (and nights, presumably) of total darkness, it is difficult to conceive how modern conveniences and lifestyles would be much affected.  Still another reason to resist solar power, however! If these days and nights are combined with some vision of nuclear winter or volcanic eruptions, wouldn’t that be more important to prophesy than 72 hours of night? So don’t give up your modern conveniences, America–you’ll need them to get through those three days of darkness–except for the fact that there won’t be three days of darkness–not this year, anyway.  Electronic generating plants won’t run out of coal owing to administration policies for at least two more years, and even then, your nincompoop president can’t make it dark 72 hours at a time!

7. The European Union will dissolve.                                                                               Of course it will, but the Europeans can’t do anything, including dissolve, in just one year, so it will more probably dissolve next year. I don’t think dissolving is even on their agenda yet. At any rate, no Europeans will dissolve in 2022.

8. A gigantic nuclear explosion will change the position of earth in the heavens and produce severe climate change. Dry climate proceeded by floods—no rainbow for 40 years, then 40 years with rainbows constantly in the skies.                           Attention, readers of WOOF: your planet will remain exactly where it is supposed too be in the heavens throughout the year 2022.  Both the Russians and the Americans have tried from time to time to dislodge it, particularly with hydrogen bombs, but even these titanic blasts left us exactly where we were with no effects on climate except for the protest song What Have They Done to the Rain? which nobody sings anymore–not even Donovan.  The current vibratory signals from the Akashic continuum suggest that the Norks [Swiss for North Koreans-Ed.] are currently attempting to explode a hydrogen bomb as opposed to merely claiming to have done so.  Even if they accomplish this, and even if they set it off in the Mediterranean [see prediction no. 5]–which would be unneighborly in the extreme, it won’t knock earth off its axis or change its position in space. This prediction is wrong!                     

9. Climate change will become so severe that high temperatures will “cook” fish in the sea. (here’s the verse):

9. “Like the sun the head shall sear the shining sea: 

The Black Sea’s living fish shall all but boil.

When Rhodes and Genoa

Half-starved shall be

The local folk to cut them up shall toil.

“How dare you?”

My personal suspicion is that all this quatrain proves is that Nostradamus foresaw the coming of Greta Tintin Eleonora Ernman Thunberg. Obliviously when you give a  little kid a name that long, she’s bound to grow up impressed with herself, and this is what happened to Greta. A couple of years ago she sailed to America to blame you for all the world’s ecological problems, real and imagined, and found time to visit the United Nations long enough to ask them, quiveringly,  “How dare you?” to which I do not recall them having a ready response. Anyway, her histrionics focused many Americans even more keenly on the idea of global warming, and here comes a quatrain in which planetary warming has practically turned the Black Sea into a giant bowl of bouillabaisse–the timing is just too perfect.  I believe that by tossing Thunberg this prophetic soft ball, Nostradamus is simply smiling across the centuries, one prophet of doom to another. Meanwhile,dwellers around the Baltic Sea will simply have to continue boiling their own fish.

Maybe we should focus on the yummy side of climate change!    READ MORE:

Read the rest of this entry »


In Science and the Paranormal forum on January 4, 2022 at 12:00 pm

NEWS ITEM: Child abducting aliens run roughshod over the inhabitants of Veronezh (story below).

Verum est, in mea saucer.

High on WOOF’s out-of-print summer reading list: Logan Robinson’s romp through soviet Russia!

There’s this great part in Logan Robinson’s book, An American in Leningrad, where he describes watching Brezhnev give a speech backed by a phalanx of Russian army troops. Every time Brezhnev makes this-or-that ridiculous assertion of Communist superiority, the troops are required to shout in cadence, “Yes! And it’s all true, too!” Well, this WOOF screed relates instances of UFO activity over past years and also of contemporary concern, and before you ask, yes, they’re all true, too! Really. No data hereinafter adduced are fake news, as your friendly neighborhood Ufologist can easily confirm. And the fact is, gentle readers, that aliens don’t seem to have much use for Russians, or any other variety of commie creep.The following news flash is fresh off the AP wire, meaning, of course, rife with incontrovertible detail! But seriously, the willingness of AP to risk its already diaphanous prestige on a UFO report is fairly impressive. And according to the AP story, “Tass news agency said today that scientists have confirmed the landing of an alien spaceship carrying giant people with tiny heads,” and at least one robot. (Yes, and its all true too, although probably only TASS and the AP can report such a matter deadpan!)

“Zap, you’re brain is reset!”

Children terrorized by rowdy alien giants with tiny heads.

It happened on Thursday, September 27th, 1989, in the sleepy berg of Voronezh, about 300 miles from Moscow. According to Soviet authorities, the townsfolk and no less a person than police Lt. Sergei A. Matveyev, pin-headed extraterrestrials invaded the town. It started when a banana-shaped spaceship that had been observed hovering in the sky for several days landed in the park and disgorged a pair of space-suited aliens and their obnoxious robot.

The aliens were 9 feet tall, which is give or take, presumably, because nobody measured them. They proceeded to  terrorize the locals, who were reportedly “trembling with fear for several days” in the aftermath. How residents determined that one of the visitors was a robot remains a mystery. The silver-suited interlopers even went so far as to take a short “promenade” around the city park during which they caused at least one screaming child to vanish by shooting him with a ray gun. Witnesses swear the child reappeared once the aliens returned to their banana and took off, although the boy could remember nothing, which may indicate he was taken in an effort to release him from Communist brain washing. Investigators later found the area revealed high levels of Cesium-23, but compered to what is not specified, and might be a significant datum given the generally hazardous condition of the soviet environment.,

Avoiding “thought bacteria!”

Alien interviewer Pavel Mukhortov.

Around the same time, the newspaper Socialist Industry reported an “encounter” between a milkmaid in the region of Perm and a spaceman who, she said, was taller than humans but exhibited shorter legs. Apparently the entity was accompanied by “an abominable snowman” who stole apples from a communal orchard whilst the milkmaid and the space alien chatted telepathically. The Soviet newspaper Komsomolskaya Pravda insisted that an Abominable Snowman had also been caught stealing apples in the Saratov region and that scientists “registered the influence of energies” at the site in Perm, leading a geologist to deduce the existence of  a UFO “landing field” thereabouts. The same story offers the transcripts of a telepathic interview that a journalist from Riga, one Pavel Mukhortov, conducted with one of the extraterrestrials, presumably of the non- abominable variety..

“Where are you from?” asks Mukhortov.

Thought bacteria (FILE COPY)

“The red star of the Constellation of Libra is our home.” says the alien.

“Could you shift me to your planet?”

“That will mean no return for you and danger for us.”

“What danger?”

“Thought bacteria!”

Amen, Comrade Alien!

Deeply submerged animosities….

Artists rendering of anti-communist aquatic humanoids.

Lake Baikal in hyperborean  southeastern Siberia may be the planet’s oldest and deepest lake. It is estimated to run to depths in excess of five thousand feet, and is at least 25 million years old. Locals (what few there are) have long held that it also supports a UFO base. Naturally, sober scientific investigation into a plethora of plant and animal species unique to the region is a longtime preoccupation of Russian ecologists. while claims of wild paranormal and UFO encounters are less investigated, or were, at least until 1982. Old Soviet Navy files have since been released confirming what the UFO community considered a rumor until recently.

In the early 1980s, Soviet navy divers were training for cold water conditions in the foreboding depths of Lake Baikal when they realized they had company. Bizarre humanoid figures suddenly appeared, swimming in close proximity to the Russians.  Soviet divers say the figures approached them closely enough to observe that even 165 feet under the surface, they wore no anti-pressure equipment and gave no indication of carrying breathing devices, although they wore dome-like helmets and tight-fitting metallic-looking suits. It was also estimated the creatures were ten feet in height. (In Russia they like their anomalous entities tall.)

The encounter might have concluded on a peaceful note had not the Soviet commander ordered his men to capture an alien. Accordingly, divers attempted to throw a large net over one of the mysterious entities. This turned out to be a pronouncedly sub-optimal decision.The “aliens” opened up with excruciating blasts of sonar waves that seemed to knock out the majority of Russian divers  who were then, somehow, propelled to the surface with life-threatening rapidity. As one might expect, each diver suffered decompression sickness (“the bends”) as a result of the unnatural ascent, and, owing to substandard decompression facilities, several died. 

How much–just to the lake?

And this is not the only alien encounter with Russian personnel in the eastern Siberian territory. During the late 1950s a TU-104 jet was assaulted by what witnesses described as silver flying saucer. After radioing that his plane had been disabled by an unidentified metallic craft, the pilot crashed into…you guessed it: Lake Baikal. If the given designation is correct, the plane was designed for passenger service as a two-engine medium-range Soviet airliner and may or may not have been carrying passengers.

A commercial TU-104 jet in AEROFLOP livery.

Alien favoritism...

Proof positive of captured alien technology?

Alexander Semyonov, a Russian who leads a group called Ecology of the Unknown, complains that UFO intelligences play favorites, giving secret alien scientific information to the Americans while stiffing the Russians.  Semyonov asserts that UFOs explain much of the technological superiority of the United States over Russia, notably B-2 stealth bombers and iPhones. Such devices, according to Semyonov, provide clear-cut proof that aliens conspire with the Pentagon, spurning the Russian Defense Ministry.  We say, tough!

We bombed in Sasovo!

Through an FOI request we procured the heading: ‘STRANGE ROAR’ PRECEDES ‘MYSTERIOUS BLAST’ IN SASOVO SOURCE: MOSCOW PRAVDA IR RUSSIAN 15 APR 91 FIRST EDITION : On April 12th, 1990, shock waves from an explosion “roared down” the streets in Sasovo. The shock waves tore roofs from homes and buildings, shattered windows and melted their frames.  Residents described being rocked as though caught in an earthquake. The FOI report insists that “THE ALARMED RESIDENTS COULD NOT RECOVER THEIR COMPOSURE BEFORE MORNING, PEOPLE WERE IN SHOCK”and some had been cut by glass fragments from shattered windows, “There are people who supposedly saw a moving fiery sphere” and hence, while “the cause of the explosion is still a mystery,” one group of citizens believe they were hit by a meteor, while others say “A  powerful air bomb” hit the town. Many residents insist UFOs are to blame.

To add insult to injury, the aliens were back on July 8, 1992 and it all happened again, complete with further  reports of anomalous aerial phenomena.

Cosmic Jelly Fish attacks City!

A witness’s sketch of the jelly saucer attacking Petrozavodsk.

The Petrozavodsk phenomenon was a series of celestial events  that began on September 20, 1977.  While sightings of inexplicable aerial phenomena were reported from Helsinki to Vladivostok, the main event happened in the city of Petrozavodsk in the Soviet Union where a glowing object resembling a gigantic jelly fish pelted the area with mysterious  rays. Prior to the assault, UFOs reportedly showered the city with a red mist that burned eyes and nostrils and induced amnesia, possibly as an additional effort to erase elements of s communist brain washing.. Afterwards residents reported a universal feeling of lethargy combined with an unshakable sense of gloom beyond (presumably) the normative levels inherent in Soviet citizenship. When the jelly fish attacked, windows were pitted and window frames melted. Asked for an explanation, the Academy of Sciences of the USSR sagely concluded that “”based on the available data, it is unfeasible to satisfactorily understand the observed phenomenon.”

Freeze, earthlings!

A CIA report dated March 27th, 1993 that appears to have leaked itself among a bumper crop of FOI responses on other matters relates the deaths of 23 Russian soldiers. The troops, according to the Ukrainian newspaper Ternopil vechirniy, were alerted to a low-flying saucer-shaped object  that appeared over their military encampment during a training exercise in Siberia. One soldier, acting on orders, fired a surface to air missile at the alien craft. The explosion appeared to damage the disc, forcing it to land. But being shot down appears merely to have  enraged the doughty alien crew.

According to the translated report, five alien creatures of heterodoxically (for Russia) short stature with large heads and black, catlike eyes escaped from the stricken craft and merged with one another, transforming themselves into a brilliant white orb, or spherical ball of light that “buzzed and hissed.” Seconds later, the blindingly illumined ball exploded, turning 23 onlooking Russian soldiers to something approximating limestone. Two survivors were wise enough to take cover earlier and provided detailed reports to the Soviet authorities. Fortunately, their 23 comrades remained petrified in perpetuity, providing ample evidence of the survivors’ veracity and harrowing escape. What happened to the aliens who became a hissing ball of light is not recorded, but to paraphrase Roger McGuinn, we hope they got home all right.

Bad blood!

It is a stone (forgive us) truth that since at least the early 1950s, Russian military forces have been doing their utmost to shoot down UFOs, and with remarkably little success. As journalist Tom Rogan wrote in the Washington Examiner, UFOs are generally rather peaceable “except when rather ill-advised Russian (or Chinese) pilots attempt to engage them.” As the British Ministry of Defense archives serve to bear witness. …

WOOF knows the report, effectively synopsized above, severely underestimates the collective losses inflicted on Sino/Russian military equipment and personnel.

In the late ’40s and throughout the 1950s, attacks on Soviet military installations by alien spacecraft were terrifyingly frequent. MiG fighter aircraft sent to shoot down the flying saucers were themselves shot down, although in one instance it appears that an alien craft was also knocked from the sky. As respected UFO researcher Paul Stonehill has remarked, “The Soviets were shocked by how many UFOs invaded their air space and did what they wanted without Kremlin control.” Special interest by UFOs in secret military bases and laboratories has long been observed by Russian air defense officials whose every attempt to thwart alien interest is met with disaster.

“You know what they say, Comrades! Any interception of a UFO you can walk away from…”

Back in 2010, a Russian MP, Andrei Lebedev,  asked President Dmitry Medvedev  to investigate claims by a regional President Ilyumzhinov of the southern region of Kalymkia that he has met aliens on board a spaceship. The claim was seriously discussed and Medvedev gave no indication of disbelief.  (READ MORE) Read the rest of this entry »

%d bloggers like this: