New study suggests the aging brain is adapting, not declining
Friday, September 25, 2026
City
If the reports are substantially accurate, these are the only just verdicts. The financial rules were clear and the Premier League's credibility was at stake. The direct evidence, in the form of leaked City email officials, of violation was simply incontrovertible. The best lawyers in the King's realm, and City had a mass of them, could not have controverted those emails.
The case is unprecedented in duration, scope, and effect on competitiveness. The Premier League has harshly punished far, far less severe similar violations. This being England and this being civil law, City will appeal and likely the Premier League and the org. will reach a compromise on punishment. What are those options: fine, points deduction, expulsion from the Premier League. I don't know if stripping titles long ago won is an option. In my opinion, the EPL would not want titles stripped. In my opinion, a fine, even a gargantuan fine, would be water off a Sheikh's back. An enormous points deduction, say 100 points would amount to a suspension from the EPL. City would be forced to compete in League One (the third tier) perhaps. Expulsion seems plausible to me, but does the EPL really want to permanently keep Manchester City and the United Arab Emirates out of the highest level of English football? I think not. City have been a boon to the Premier League, a breathtaking success on the pitch, a financial windfall off, and has kept the English league as the consensus best in the world. And, not incidentally, expulsion could jumpstart a European Super League, the nightmare of all domestic leagues.
But this will not stand, and it should not stand. I expect a hefty points deduction and the mother of all fines.
CITY FOREVER!
Thursday, September 24, 2026
NAZA
Israeli conduct in Gaza, the West Bank, Lebanon, and Iran is the defining moral issue of our time. Take a stand, Israel uber alles, anti-This Israel. Of course, you may stand on the sidelines, which is taking a stand that you don't care enough to be for or against Israel. The victors write history. That has been the adage for over a century at least. Israel clearly is winning the body-count war. It is a first-world leader in starvation. Thus Israel uber alles may be a safe stance if you want to cut your risks. But avoid rashness. Israel is losing the battle for world public opinion and we are late in futures trading. Anti-This Israel has big mo, and the moral high ground. In my adult lifetime Israel has never been such a pariah. It could win the body count and yet become even more hated than it is. Or ever has been in my memory. Let your conscience guide you, not whether you win your bet.
This is it. This is your personal test. You will likely not face the imperative to take a stand on the defining moral issue of your time again.The undersigned is on record where he stands. Repeatedly. 31,800 readers every day for twelve months know where I and this blog stand. Like you, probably more than you without this platform, I will reap the consequences, positive or negative, for the rest of my life. But I have no doubt, no hesitation, no wavering on my stand. You and I will be judged on this forever.
Public Occurrences September 24, 2026
Nets at UN Speaking to his Usual Standing Room Only Audience
"Everybody hates you! You'd be in jail if it wasn't for me!"
Israel’s Netanyahu, at UN, calls accusations of genocide in Gaza ‘the biggest lie of the century’
AP
Netanyahu says Mamdani endangers Jewish New Yorkers by spreading lies about Israel’s actions in Gaza
AP
🤣
8:46 am:
In re No, You Didn't, Trump-Greenland:While the new defense agreement is a bit broader, the United States already had extensive military access under an existing 1951 deal and all the gains laid out in the agreement signed on the sidelines of the U.N. General Assembly on Tuesday could, ostensibly, have been achieved by asking nicely a year ago. The trans-Atlantic distrust created since the end of 2024 seems a very high price to pay for what may ultimately be a fairly incremental gain
Everything that Trump does is, in his and Natalie's minds, the greatest thing on the subject that could ever be done, achievable only by him. "Every president has wanted to"...White House ballroom, Iran, et al; "only I can fix it"...the economy. The King of Bankruptcies, the Losingest Law Suitor, the 34-Time Convicted Felon, the Only Man Who Has Been Impeached Twice, makes incremental gains at great cost, as with Greenland, when he's not abjectly failing (as with Iran); takes baby steps and proclaims them Giant Leaps when he isn't faceplanting; tells the truth only when his failing mind fails to produce le mot juste lie; and thinks he's the GOAT POTUS whose visage belongs on Mount Rushmore when history will confine him, and already has, to the bottom of Mount Trashmore.
Wednesday, September 23, 2026
Yesterday when I came home from FIU, Eleven, in heat, climbed on my shoulders per usual as I read something on the computer. She fell off my shoulder and instinctively clawed at anything to break her fall. That would be my left hand. I felt the skin rip.
The first one this morning.
I told my family and sent them the first couple photos but I have not told them this: I felt bad about myself. This has tilted me. I feel not in control. I am doubting my competence at life. Somehow, I can't prevent an itty-bitty three pound cat from mauling me as if I had fallen into a lion's cage at the zoo. It has affected my psychology and emotions. "Is it weird of me to post so many photos?" So, I deleted some in this post. I am embarrassed that my cat fell and accidentally clawed me. One of the photos above I took when I was in Publix. It's disfiguring. It looks like I got attacked with a claw hammer. I was afraid people might look bug-eyed at it. I feel humiliated. My nerves are frayed. I can't stop taking photos of it. Can't stop looking at it.
It was an accident. Not Eleven's fault. Not my fault certainly, but not intentional on Eleven's part.
Yes, but this type of accident is exactly what I have long feared could happen to my carotid artery, in which event I would not be alive to write this post.
But my hand looks worse than it is. I felt it of course, but the real sting came when I washed it. The cuts are only skin deep, no puncture wounds or damage to tendons or nerves. No (real) harm, no foul?
I know it's not my fault, nor Eleven's, but I interrogate myself: "What do you mean taking a random stray cat in and treating it like it's a baby human? "Honey"; "I love you"; "my little girl", etc. Eleven is not a little girl, she's not human. But I treat her as if she was, even talk to her. "I'm going to go get some food honey, daddy will be right back." I'm not her father. But I love her. I have felt love, or as close as a cat can get to love, from her. She was the only full-time roommate I ever had here and the last! But now...
After this happened yesterday afternoon I kept us separate, she in the room I'm not. We're separate now. I haven't talked to her, haven't cooed at her, haven't played with her. I don't yet miss that closeness, that faux closeness. She is a plant or a wall hanging now, not my beloved sentient companion in my golden years.
You know how you read that people are badly beaten, maimed by a random stranger? I've read that in a weird way they fault themselves. Like, "There must be something particularly loathsome about me that a random stranger picks me to hurt so badly. Maybe I am so unlovable that I deserved it." That shit happens, some victims of random violence do think that shit.
Anyway, "With writing so much pain disappears". I needed to talk to someone about how I feel and now I've gotten it off my chest to all of you. I can't stop looking at the hand but maybe now at least I can stop taking gross autopsy photos of it.
"Can you say a word for us, sir?" (no response)
"How’s it going, Mitch? Can we get a thumbs up?" (no response)
"Senator, how are you feeling today?" (no response)
"Can you say a word for us, sir?" (no response)
...
On Thursday,...He struggled when he was required to vote to help Republicans advance the Farm Bill.
When McConnell’s name was read, North Dakota Republican Senator John Hoeven leaned in towards him and told him to vote “No,” and the 84-year-old could be heard quietly saying “aye.”
There is no evidence that Sen. Mitch McConnell understands what he is saying or what is said to him and little evidence that he can speak.
Public Occurrences September 23, 2026
American Peoples' Choice at U.N. Asserts Law of Jungle, Threatens to "Annihilate" Iran, Fantasies U.S. Economy "envy of world"
Tuesday, September 22, 2026
She's too good for them!
My ex-wife, French-Canadian by heritage, Zelensky fan-girl since war:
My response:
🤣🤣🤣
Monday, September 21, 2026
Public Occurrences September 21, 2026
Mamdani makes Trump a different, better man. I have never seen this narcissistic, stage- hog so MODEST, deferential. It is really wonderful to see.
Allah bless America's mayor.
South Africa v Israel
You may perhaps be curious, as I was to read the one dissenting opinion against all aspects of the genocide case brought, for preliminary finding only, before the International Court of Justice Genocide Court. If so be mindful of the adage that "curiosity kills the cat." If still curious, read on.
By way of brief background, the case was brought in 2004 for actions taken by Israel in response to the October 7 massacre; the IGC has jurisdiction only on cases of genocide, not war crimes, not international human rights violations.
By way of further background, every international body of which I am aware (and one national body in Israel) has found at least probable cause (or the equivalent) that Israel committed genocide. It is truly beyond reasonable dispute and the votes in the case at bar 16-1, 15-2, and13-2, reflect the overwhelming consensus. Arrest warrants have been issued for the Prime Minister of Israel, for its current Defense Minister, and for its prior Defense Minister. In this case, even Israel's representative voted in favor of this prima facie showing of genocide, as did the United States. Only one Justice of the Court, a permanent member (there are temporaries), Julia Sebutinde, voted against any finding that Israel did, or preliminarily may have, committed genocide.
By way of brief statutory background:
-Israel and South Africa are signatories to the international genocide convention.
-Genocide has five, I think six, alternative enumerated elements. Alternative because not all need be supported, it is enough to constitute genocide that only one be supported by evidence.
-The genocide law requires a state actor. A lone individual cannot be a perpetrator of genocide unless acting in official capacity of a state and then it is the state who is the defendant.
-Genocide requires a cognizable victim, a people with a specific racial, ethnic, or religious identity.
-The genocide statute is also exclusionary: at the insistence of the United States when adopted (We were thinking of the German Nazi Party during World War II), political entities such as political parties, are excluded as a cognizable victim group.
-Apparently, according to the dissent, actions perpetrated in territorial disputes are also excluded.
-And, the genocide law, like all criminal statutes, requires an intent to commit genocide against the victim group "as such", that is an specific intent to exterminate a victim group.
Finally, by way of brief summary of the dissent, Justice Sebutinde finds:
-That the Court lacks jurisdiction
-That the seventy-plus year dispute between Israel and the Palestinians is political and territorial, thus taking it outside the definition of genocide.
So with that as background, we turn to the dissenting opinion of Justice Julia Sebutinde in South Africa v Israel, which can be found in its entirety here, and to learned legal commentary by the undersigned.
Synopsis:
In my respectful dissenting opinion the dispute between the State of Israel
and the people of Palestine is essentially and historically a political one,
calling for a diplomatic or negotiated settlement...
...
Thus, while it is not inconceivable that grave violations of international humanitarian law amounting to war crimes or crimes against humanity could have been committed against the civilian populations both in Israel and in Gaza (a matter over which the Court has no jurisdiction in the present case), such grave violations [i.e. war crimes or violations of International Humanitarian Law] do not, in and of themselves, constitute “acts of genocide” as defined in Article II of the Genocide Convention, unless it can be demonstrated that they were committed “with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such."
She is granting the people of Israel and the Palestinian people of Gaza equal footing, but neither the actions of Israeli Jews nor Gaza Palestinians on Oct. 7 acted "with intent to destroy, in whole or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such." That is: Hamas, a political party, attacked what, fucking Likud?, not Jewish people "as such"?; and Likud, a political party, attacked Hamas, a political party, not the Gaza Palestinian people "as such"? This is absurd.
Furthermore, I am also strongly of the view that the controversy or dispute between the State of Israel and the people of Palestine is essentially and historically a political or territorial (and, I dare say, ideological) one.
In other words, the Palestinians are not a people...But she uses the phrase "people of Palestine." ?? Does she view Hamas as the "people of Palestine"? Are Israeli Jews not a "people"?
It is my considered opinion that the dispute or controversy is not a legal one calling for judicial settlement by the International Court of Justice. Unfortunately, the failure, reluctance or inability of States to resolve political controversies such as this one through effective diplomacy or negotiations may sometimes lead them to resort to a pretextual invocation of treaties like the Genocide Convention...
An appreciation of the historical controversy between the State of Israel and the people of Palestine is a necessary prerequisite to appreciating the context in which the Court is seised with the present case.
II. Political Context of the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict
Israel's creation was a political decision.5. The United Nations has been heavily involved in the Israeli-Palestinian conflict throughout its history. In 1947, only two years after the founding of the United Nations, the General Assembly recommended a plan of partition regarding the government of the Mandate of Palestine. That plan provided for the creation of two independent States — one Jewish and one Arab — in recognition of the dual rights of self-determination by the Jewish and Arab inhabitants of the land (General Assembly resolution 181 (II) of 29 November 1947). This laid the foundation for the creation of the State of Israel in May 1948. Unfortunately, the rejection of the partition plan by certain Arab leaders and the outbreak of war in 1948 prevented the realization of the laudable goal of two States for two peoples. Since that time, and in particular since the Israeli seizure of the West Bank and Gaza Strip in the 1967 Arab Israeli war, the United Nations has remained seised of the conflict.
7. The international community’s focus on encouraging negotiation between the parties has borne fruit, including the 1979 peace treaty between Israel and Egypt and 1994 peace agreement between Israel and Jordan. Most notably, the 1993 Oslo Accords resulted in the recognition by the Palestinian
Liberation Organization (“PLO”) of the State of Israel and the recognition by Israel of the PLO as the representative of the Palestinian people.
...
8. Since that time, the United Nations has repeatedly affirmed the need for negotiations aimed at achieving a two-State solution and resolving the dispute between Israel and Palestine. In 2003, the Security Council, in resolution 1515, “[e]ndorse[d] the Quartet Performance-based Roadmap to a
Permanent Two-State Solution to the Israeli-Palestinian Conflict” (the Quartet was composed of representatives of the United States, European Union, Russian Federation and United Nations) (Security Council resolution 1515 of 19 November 2003). ...Similarly, the Security Council in 2008 declared its support for negotiations between the parties and “support[ed] the parties’ agreed principles for the bilateral negotiating process and their determined efforts to reach their goal of concluding a peace treaty resolving all outstanding issues” (Security Council resolution 1850 of
16 December 2008). ...
Okay, so all of this is political efforts and in her opinion, once politics always politics.
10. Finally, the Court has itself previously pronounced on the importance of continued negotiations. ...
11. As can be seen from the above history, it is clear that a permanent solution to the Israeli-Palestinian conflict can only result from good faith negotiations between Israeli and Palestinian representatives working towards the achievement of a just and sustainable two-State solution. A solution cannot be imposed from outside, much less through judicial settlement. This context must be kept in mind...
I really think this woman has a brain defect. She is writing that once political, always political, never can be genocidal. What would she consider an Iranian nuclear attack on Israel that wiped out the entire population? Iran has stated numerous times that it's intent is to wipe Israel off the face of the earth? "Oh, but see that's then a territorial dispute not genocidal intent." :o
III. The Events of 7 October 2023
12.
On 7 October 2023, thousands of members of the Harakat al-Muqawama
al-Islamiya (“Islamic Resistance Movement” or “Hamas”), a Palestinian
Sunni Islamic political and military organization governing the Gaza Strip,
invaded the territory of the State of Israel under cover of thousands of
rockets fired indiscriminately into Israel and committed massacres, mutilations, rapes and abductions of hundreds of Israeli civilians, including men,
women and children. (Israel reports that over 1,200 people were murdered
that day, more than 5,500 maimed, and over 240 hostages abducted, including infants, entire families, the elderly, the disabled, as well as Holocaust
survivors.) ...
13. Soon after the 7 October attack, Israel, in exercise of what it describes
as “its right to defend itself”, launched a “military operation” into the Gaza
Strip whose objective was, first, to defeat Hamas and its network and,
secondly, to rescue the Israeli hostages. South Africa claims that as a result
of the armed conflict that ensued between Israel and Hamas over the past
11 weeks, 1.9 million Palestinians living in Gaza (85 per cent of the population) have been internally displaced; over 22,000 Palestinians, including
over 7,729 children, have been killed; over 7,780 are missing and/or presumed dead under the rubble; over 55,243 are severely injured or have
suffered mental harm; and vast areas of Gaza, including entire neighbourhoods have been destroyed including 355,000 homes, places of worship,
cemeteries, cultural and archaeological sites, hospitals and other critical
infrastructure.
14. On 28 December 2023, South Africa filed an Application with the Registry instituting proceedings against Israel concerning alleged violations of
the Genocide Convention. South Africa alleges that the acts taken by Israel
against the Palestinian people in the wake of the attacks in Israel of 7 October 2023 are genocidal in character because “they are intended to bring
about the destruction of a substantial part of the Palestinian national, racial
and ethnical group, that being the part of the Palestinian group in the Gaza
Strip” (Application, para. 1). In South Africa’s view, Israel has violated its
obligations under the Genocide Convention in several respects, including by
failing to prevent genocide; committing genocide; and failing to prevent or punish the direct and public incitement to genocide. ...
15. ...For its part, Israel, whilst acknowledging that the
events of 7 October 2023 and the ensuing war between Hamas and Israel
have wracked untold suffering on innocent Israeli and Palestinian civilians,
including unprecedented loss of life, protests the Applicant’s description of
Israel’s conduct during this war as “genocide”. Israel argues that not every
conflict is genocidal, nor does the threat or use of force necessarily constitute an act of genocide within the meaning of Article II of the Genocide
Convention. Israel maintains that, in view of the ongoing threat, brutality
and lawlessness of Hamas that it continues to face, it has an inherent and
legitimate duty to protect the Israeli people and territory, in accordance with
international humanitarian law, from attack by an armed group or groups that have openly declared their intention to annihilate the Jewish State. In
Israel’s view, South Africa’s present request for the indication of provisional
measures is tantamount to an attempt to deny Israel its ability to meet its
legal obligation to defend its citizens, rescue its hostages still in Hamas custody and to enable the over 110,000 internally displaced Israelis to safely
return to their homes. ...
...
IV A. There Are No Indicators of a Genocidal Intent
on the Part of Israel
...
What distinguishes
the crime of genocide from other grave violations of international human
rights law (including those enumerated in Article II, paragraphs (a) to (d), of
the Genocide Convention) is the existence of the “intent to destroy, in whole
or in part, a national, ethnical, racial or religious group, as such”.
That "as such" again. If a state says, "No, no, no, we were intent on destroying the political group The Federalist Society and some anti-Federalists got in the way as collateral damage, there is an incontrovertible presumptions in our favor that we did not seek to destroy Jews or Palestinians, or Presbyterians, "as such". It is preposterous.
Accordingly, the acts complained of by South Africa, as well as the rights correlated to those acts, can only be capable of “falling within the scope of the said Convention” if a genocidal intent is present, otherwise such acts simply constitute grave violations of international humanitarian law and not genocide as such.
...
20. Israel contests that it is committing acts of genocide in Gaza or that it
has a specific intent to destroy, in whole or in part, the Palestinian people, as
such. Israel emphasized that its war is not against the Palestinian people as
such, but rather is against Hamas, the terrorist organization in control of
Gaza that is bent on annihilating the State of Israel.
That is what she is doing. Israel says, "What us? Genocide? Nah. We're going against a political party, Hamas; 85% of Gaza Palestinians voted for Hamas, you know, Court. Yes, some children and women and journalists and hospitals got in the way and there was an unfortunate diet that Palestinian Gazans were conducting in extremis, but diets are fads, sort of like political parties and we can kill them."
Israel states that the sole
objectives of its military operation in Gaza are the rescue of Israeli hostages
abducted on 7 October 2023 and the protection of the Israeli people from
displacement and from any future attacks by Hamas, including by neutralizing Hamas’ command structures and machinery. The Respondent further
argues that any genocidal intent alleged by the Applicant is negated by
(1) Israel’s restricted and targeted attacks of legitimate military targets in
Gaza;
"Restricted and targeted attacks on military targets"! Ho ho ho.
(2) its mitigation of civilian harm by warning them through leaflets,
radio messages and telephone calls of impending attacks;...
Righttt, Palestinians intentionally disconnected their phones.
...and (3) its facilitation of humanitarian assistance.
Like closing the only exit gate from Gaza resulting in starvation and a humanitarian crisis. In fairness not due her I note that the ICJ Order to which Justice Sebutinde dissented, was issued on January 26, 2024, before the gate closure and the starvation crisis. Perhaps she has changed her mind. Or gotten a frontal lobotomy.
Israel also argues that the statements relied
upon by South Africa as containing genocidal rhetoric were all taken out of
context and in fact were made in reference to Hamas, not the Palestinian
people as such.
There is that phrase again, "as such". It wasn't the Palestinian people "as such" who were targeted or threatened by language with extermination (and if it was the statements were "taken out of context"), it was HAMAS "as such" all of whom are Palestinian. The babies, the elderly, the journalists, the emergency responders were all part of HAMAS, not the Palestinian people "as such". lol
Moreover, Israel argued that any other persons who might
have made statements containing genocidal rhetoric were completely outside the policy and decision-making processes of the State of Israel.
This is deadly serious stuff but I'm sorry I have to guffaw at that last, and some other of the above. Judge Sebutinde is a Likud plant or the functional equivalent.
21. As stated above, the tragic events of 7 October 2023 as well as the
ensuing war in Gaza are symptoms of a more deeply engrained political controversy between the State of Israel and the people of Palestine.
It's politics all the way down. Under Justice Sebutinde's logic, no "political controversy" can ever devolve into genocide.
Having
examined the evidence put forward by each of the Parties, I am not convinced
that a prima facie showing of a genocidal intent, by way of indicators, has
been made out against Israel.
-The war was not started by Israel but rather by
Hamas who attacked Israel on 7 October 2023 thereby sparking off the military operation in Israel’s defence and in a bid to rescue its hostages.
What does who started it have to do with the price of tea in China? If someone murders my child, may I murder him? No! Not under any legal definition of self-defense. Retribution is not self-defense. Justice Sebutinde incorporates Israel's arguments in toto in her dissent, accepting them as fact!
Look:
I
also must agree that any “genocidal intent” alleged by the Applicant is
negated by (1) Israel’s restricted and targeted attacks of legitimate military
targets in Gaza; (2) its mitigation of civilian harm by warning them through
leaflets, radio messages and telephone calls of impending attacks; and (3) its facilitation of humanitarian assistance. A careful examination of Israel’s war
policy and of the full statements of the responsible government officials further demonstrates the absence of a genocidal intent. ...
...Here I must hasten to
add that Israel is expected to conduct its military operation in accordance
with international humanitarian law but violations of IHL cannot be the
subject of these proceedings which are purely pursuant to the Genocide
Convention. Unfortunately, the scale of suffering and death experienced in
Gaza is exacerbated not by genocidal intent, but rather by several factors,
including the tactics of the Hamas organization itself which often entails its
forces embedding amongst the civilian population and installations, rendering them vulnerable to legitimate military attack.
Much of that is true. Hamas does embed. Some of it is not true.
22. Regarding the statements of Israeli top officials and politicians that
South Africa cited as containing genocidal rhetoric, a careful examination of
those statements, read in their proper and full context, shows that South
Africa has either placed the quotations out of context or simply misunderstood the statements of those officials. The vast majority of the statements
referred to the destruction of Hamas and not the Palestinian people as such.
Certain renegade statements by officials who are not charged with prosecuting Israel’s military operations were subsequently highly criticized by the
Israeli Government itself. More importantly, the official war policy of the
Israeli Government, as presented to the Court, contains no indicators of a
genocidal intent. In my assessment, there are also no indicators of incitement
to commit genocide.
23. In sum, I am not convinced that the acts complained of by the Applicant are capable of falling within the scope of the Genocide Convention, in
particular because it has not been shown, even on a prima facie basis, that
Israel’s conduct in Gaza is accompanied by the necessary genocidal intent.
Is your curiosity satisfied? You're welcome.
College Football is Bankrupting College Football
Since joining the B1G in 2014 Rutgers' athletic department debt has soared to a cumulative $516.9 million. Italicized because the B1G is the co-leader in distribution of revenue to its members. It is only going to get worse. College athletes are now being paid millions, Rutgers' budget for players is $20M-$23M--and that is only 14th in the conference--coaches are being given guaranteed contracts worth eight figures. When they are fired they still collect. It's unforgivable and unsustainable for public educational institutions.
Sunday, September 20, 2026
Vlodomyr Zelensky AND THE SPIRIT OF UKRAINE
It is incomparable, unconquerable, inspirational. The people of Ukraine are the best and the brightest and the most beautiful, inside and out, of humankind.🌻
Public Occurrences September 20, 2026
Ukraine fires over 1,000 drones at Russia, including ‘largest ever’ attack on Moscow
Since Russia’s invasion more than four years ago, Ukraine has become a global leader in military drone technology, deploying domestically produced long-range drones alongside missiles for strikes deep inside Russia. Its drone technology has impressed governments and defense manufacturers around the world.
AP
5:30 pm:
Since Russia’s invasion more than four years ago, Ukraine has become a global leader in military drone technology, deploying domestically produced long-range drones alongside missiles for strikes deep inside Russia. Its drone technology has impressed governments and defense manufacturers around the world.
AP
5:30 pm:
Trump Going to Gracie Mansion to Visit NYC Mayor Mamdani Monday
Frenemies
.jpeg)
.jpeg)
"The worst human being to ever occupy the office. Just reprehensible scum." DITTO, RON!
Ron Filipkowski
@RonFilipkowski
The worst human being to ever occupy the office. Just reprehensible scum.
Acyn
@Acyn
Sep 16
Trump on why it’s important for him to have his name the Kennedy Center: For me to go and fix it and subsidize it, I think the Trump Administration should have recognition. If we don’t do that, it’s going to close and get ripped down.
6:58 PM · Sep 16, 2026
The Buccaneers (0-2) were driving and had a second-and-4 at the Cleveland 28 when the game was suspended at the two-minute warning.
When it finally resumed, heavy rain started falling again.
Bucky Irving ran twice and Baker Mayfield's pass to Ted Hurst got the Bucs to the 13 before a holding penalty set them back. Mayfield's pass on fourth-and-10 from the 20 to Emeka Egbuka in the end zone was out of his reach, sealing the win for the Browns (1-1).
*
JennaLaineESPN
@JennaLaineESPN
Weather update: Very aggressive lightning bolt and a collective "OMG" in the press box just now. It looked close and it sounded close too. When those lightning strikes happen, it resets the [30-minute wait] clock.
5:14 PM · Sep 20, 2026
The NFL rule is that when lightning hits within an 8-10 mile radius of the venue the game is halted. There is an automatic 30-minute wait period after the last lightning strike. The game was delayed at 3:59 pm. Since Jenna Laine reported a dangerous, close lightning strike at 5:14, the earliest the game could have restarted was 5:44 pm.
The longest NFL weather-delay is 2 hours 2 minutes in Miami on September 9, 2018.
*Update This game is now officially the longest weather delay in Niffle history.
Subscribe to:
Posts (Atom)
