I love these times when I can report on the release of hostages or prisoners of war, instead of adding to the numbers of those still imprisoned.
And this week, it was another swap between Russia and Ukraine — each side sending home 185 POWs and 20 civilians, most of whom have been incarcerated since early in the war that began in February 2022.
Ukrainian POWs Return Home – October 2, 2025
To add to the excitement, I am able today to delete from my list of known POW’s the group I call “The Azov 12” — a dozen members of the Ukrainian Army’s Azov Brigade, taken prisoner after one of the most brutal standoffs of the war at Mariupol near the Sea of Azov and finally included in this latest exchange.
A joyous day indeed!
*. *. *
But of course, never to be forgotten are the tens — perhaps hundreds — of thousands of those still awaiting release.
Once again, here is the list of the ones I know of:
Immigrant Detainees in Russia:
Migrants from the Central Asian nations of Kazakhstan, Kyrgyzstan, Tajikistan, Turkmenistan and Uzbekistan
Prisoners of War:
The 19,500 Kidnapped Ukrainian Children The People of Ukraine The Azov 12
Endangered Exiles:
Mikita Losik Yulia Navalnaya Countless Journalists and Other Dissidents
Ales Bialiatski Andrei Chapiuk Marya Kalesnikava Uladzimir Labkovich Marfa Rabkova Valiantsin Stafanovic Yuras Zyankovich
In China:
Chenyue Mao (American)
In Russia:
David Barnes (American) Gordon Black (American) Antonina Favorskaya Konstantin Gabov Robert Gilman (American) Stephen James Hubbard (American) Sergey Karelin Timur Kishukov Vadim Kobzev Darya Kozyreva Artyom Kriger Michael Travis Leake (American) Aleksei Liptser Grigory Melkonyants Nika Novak Nadezhda Rossinskaya (a.k.a. Nadin Geisler) Sofiane Sehili (French) Igor Sergunin Dmitry Shatresov Robert Shonov Grigory Skvortsov Eugene Spector (American) Laurent Vinatier Robert Romanov Woodland (American)
You have not been overlooked; please stay strong, and have faith that your turn will come soon.
Despite being known as “Europe’s last dictator”; and despite his record of brutal authoritarianism since assuming the presidency of Belarus in 1994; and despite the questionable legitimacy of his subsequent re-elections; and despite his willingness to allow his country to be used as a staging ground for Russian troops and armaments in pursuance of Putin’s war against Ukraine . . . despite all of that, we now see Lukashenko openly making overtures to the U.S. But to what end?
In mid-August, as Donald Trump was en route to his now infamous meeting with Vladimir Putin in Alaska, he took the time to speak by phone with Lukashenko — the first-ever such conversation for the Belarusian leader. In a social media post following that call, Trump, believing that Lukashenko might be of help in U.S.-Russian negotiations concerning the war in Ukraine, referred to the long-ostracized dictator as “highly respected President” — even though officially the West does not recognize Lukashenko as the legitimate president of his country. [Artyom Shraibman, Carnegie Politika, August 21, 2025.]
Trump also expressed appreciation for the release of 16 prisoners (though not referring to them as “political” prisoners), and agreed to meet with Lukashenko in person at some unspecified time . . . even saying he would come to Belarus with his family. Trump’s objective was said to be the release of additional prisoners being held in Belarus, who may number as many as 1,300 in total. [Id.]
U.S. Special Envoy John Coale
Four weeks later, on September 11th, Lukashenko met with U.S. envoy John Coale in Minsk, where Coale handed him a letter from Trump, written in English and signed simply “Donald.” At that time, Lukashenko announced that he was ready to make a deal on the release of prisoners, saying:
“If Donald insists that he is ready to take in all these released prisoners, God bless you, let’s try to work out a global deal, as Mr. Trump likes to say, a big deal.” [Marina Bobrova, Reuters, September 11, 2025.]
Coale referred to Trump’s letter, and the first-name-only signature, as “a rare act of personal friendship.” [Id.]
Later that day, Belarus released 52 prisoners of various nationalities, who then traveled to Lithuania with the U.S. negotiating team.
His Usual Signature
Again, Trump’s intentions may be twofold, and perfectly legitimate: seeking the release of as many prisoners as possible, and trying to use Lukashenko’s presumed influence with Putin as leverage in negotiations to end the war in Ukraine.
But what is Lukashenko really up to? Is he merely currying favor to improve his standing in the international political hierarchy? Or is he growing weary of being under Putin’s thumb and genuinely turning Westward?
It has now come to light that on September 10th, as an estimated 700 Russian drones entered Belarusian airspace en route to the Polish border, a Belarusian military officer — not for the first time — used a dedicated phone line to call his Polish counterpart and warn him. And a similar call was made to military officials in neighboring Lithuania as well. [Mike Eckel and Andnrei Shauliuha, RFE/RL, October 3, 2025.]
In addition, there have been unconfirmed reports that a number of those drones have been shot down by Belarusian defense forces, though most have gone unreported by official sources. [Id.]
Now, that seems certain to infuriate Vladimir Putin. So why risk it?
Worth the risk?
I certainly don’t have the answer to that. But Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya, the exiled leader of Belarus’ opposition party — whose husband Syarhei is himself a recently-released political prisoner of Lukashenko — warned that the dictator is trying to fool Trump with gestures such as the release of a handful of prisoners, in exchange for which Trump has already eased some sanctions against Belarus.
While expressing appreciation for having won the recent prisoner releases, Tsikhanouskaya cautioned the U.S. “not to pay too much” for the relatively small number of people freed thus far. Noting that Lukashenko’s brutal crackdowns and mass arrests are continuing in what she called a “revolving door,” she urged that the U.S. should continue working to free prisoners while the opportunity presents itself, saying that:
. . . “people are dying in prisons. That’s why we need . . . consistent and irreversible changes, not to let this regime to take more and more and more hostages to sell them for higher price [sic].” [Michael Weissenstein, AP, September 25, 2025.]
Sviatlana Tsikhanouskaya
Again, it all boils down to a question of trust . . . and Aleksandr Lukashenko is a man who has proven many times over that he cannot, under any circumstances, be trusted. One possible scenario is that he is doing Putin’s bidding — playing up to Trump to gain an easing of sanctions or other favors that would ultimately be of benefit to Russia, if only indirectly.
In the meantime, we can only hope that Trump’s common sense — if he still has any — will for once outweigh his ego’s susceptibility to flattery.
. . . that during a government shutdown, Congress continues to receive full pay and benefits?
As of October 1st, “non-essential” government employees were furloughed, without pay, for an indefinite period of time . . . until the Senate makes up its collective mind as to whether it’s okay to render medical insurance unaffordable for millions of low- to middle-income Americans.
As for the “essential” federal workers, they continue to work . . . but also without pay. This is because all of those loyal employees — legislative assistants, administrative assistants, maintenance workers, cafeteria workers, national park rangers, etc. — are paid in accordance with a budget that has to be renewed annually.
But Congressional members’ salaries are governed by Article I, Section 6 of the U.S. Constitution. And since 1983, they have been funded by a permanent appropriation outside of the annual budget.
(Credit: Cartoon by Joe Heller)
So, while they sit and haggle over our current and future well-being, and send hundreds of thousands of people home without a source of income — and with the threat of permanent dismissal hanging over their heads, thanks to Donald Trump and OMB director Russell Vought’s latest diabolical scheme — those Senators have no clue as to how we feel when we have to wonder how long we’ll be able to put food on the table, make tuition and car payments, or hold onto our homes.
Thanks a lot, Congress. We’ll remember you at election time.
It isn’t just the lives they’ve destroyed by stalking and arresting innocent people. It isn’t even just their trashing of the U.S. Constitution. Now it’s also the trickle-down effect of their storm-trooper tactics.
By allowing masked agents, some even in civilian clothes, to grab people from their homes, their jobs, their schools, their places of worship, or simply off the streets, Donald Trump has now effectively created a new genre of criminality: ICE impersonators.
The Real Thing
Grab a gun and a mask, act like a tough guy, shout “ICE,” and you’re free to attack, rob, even kidnap innocent people at will. And all of the witnesses and CCTV footage in the world will be unable to identify you.
Since the start of this year, at least two dozen cases of people impersonating immigration officers have been revealed. These range from verbal intimidation of immigrants to actual violent crimes; and the victims have no way of determining whether their attackers are actually government agents.
California’s Governor Gavin Newsom last month signed a bill — the first in the U.S. — banning agents from wearing masks during operations in his state. But the White House declared the California law unconstitutional, and has said that ICE will not abide by it. [Alexandra Banner, CNN’s 5 Things a.m., October 3, 2025.]
California Governor Gavin Newsom
So let me get this straight: It is now “unconstitutional” to outlaw an act that is itself blatantly unconstitutional . . . right?
We all know who this is . . . and we know that he left Washington in even worse condition than he found it.
Elon Musk: The First Warning
Now meet the man who is picking up where Musk left off: Russell Vought, Director of the Office of Management and Budget.
Russell Vought: Pledging to Defend the Constitution – February 2025
Did I hear a chorus of voices asking “Who?” . . . or perhaps it was “So what?” that echoed throughout the hall. Who really cares about the government’s chief bean-counter?
Well, we should all care. Because, although his position does not earn him a place in the presidential cabinet, his department — the Office of Management and Budget (OMB) — is the largest one within the Executive Office of the U.S. President, and reports directly, and only, to the President.
According to the White House website, the OMB “ . . . serves the President of the United States in overseeing the implementation of his vision across the Executive Branch. Specifically, OMB’s mission is to assist the President in meeting his policy, budget, management and regulatory objectives and to fulfill the agency’s statutory responsibilities.”
Official Seal of OMB
In the current administration, that makes him Donald Trump’s #1 Lackey. And that is a position that carries with it a whole lot of power.
Now, that might be a good thing if the position were held by a clear-thinking, law-abiding, red-blooded American who might be able to rein in an out-of-control tyrant with a raging God complex. But Vought is cut from the same cloth as Trump, and is not just a puppet doing his boss’ bidding, but is on a long-term power trip of his own.
His history, both professional and political, is too lengthy, too complex, and too disturbing to reiterate here. For that, I urge you to peruse the article by Phil Mattingly and Jeremy Herb titled “Trump’s shutdown architect: Russ Vought’s plan to deconstruct the government was years in the making,” [CNN, October 2, 2025].
Most recently, however, as Congress fought over a budget for 2026 and the government headed toward a shutdown, Vought was busy preparing a 622-word directive that completely ignored and overrode all of the contingency plans from previous years.
This time, in the event of a shutdown, every federal agency would be required to submit detailed plans for mass layoffs.
Those plans would take immediate effect, and would only be shelved if Democrats agreed to a Republican funding measure they had already voted to reject. [Mattingly and Herb, CNN, id.] [Bold emphasis is mine.]
CNN Photo
Thus, Vought — together with Trump’s willing Republican toadies in Congress — will have conspired to place the blame for the government’s closure on the Democrats who have fought to safeguard the rights and protections afforded Americans by the Constitution.
While Musk’s DOGE was focused on his astronomical budget cuts, Vought has quietly been jockeying into a position enabling him to dismantle the entire federal bureaucracy, becoming Trump’s go-to instrument of deconstruction and destruction.
And part of their plan involves another huge swath of layoffs — estimated by some administration officials to be as many as 300,000 by the end of the year — as punishment for the Democrats’ refusal to cave in to pressure to pass the Republicans’ budget by the end of the fiscal year.
We hear quite a lot about Vance, Rubio, Hegseth, Bondi, Kennedy, and Trump himself. But sometimes it’s the quiet ones who are most treacherous, and whom we should be watching most closely.
*. *. *
Through all of the agony of the last eight months, as I have witnessed my beautiful country being gutted by a cabal of rapacious, power-mad, uber-wealthy Draculas in modern guise, I have been haunted by one question that seems to me to have no logical answer:
Once they have achieved their goal of dismantling a government that has worked well for 250 years, breaking the country’s ties with all of its long-time allies, destroying its environment and infrastructure, and enslaving its populace . . . what will they have won?
And the only picture that comes to my mind is this:
Back in 1972, when the United States was still mired in the hugely unpopular war in Vietnam, actress and anti-war activist Jane Fonda was ostracized for visiting communist North Vietnam, where she was photographed seated on a tank and spoke out against U.S. involvement in the conflict. Thereafter labelled “Hanoi Jane,” many accused her of treason, while others lauded her anti-war outspokenness at a time when organized protests against our involvement were rampant.
Jane Fonda in North Vietnam – C. 1972
Fonda survived the years of castigation, and has never changed her “peacenik” views. She followed in the footsteps of the many Hollywood acting legends, such as Henry Fonda (her father), Lucille Ball, Humphrey Bogart, Frank Sinatra, Judy Garland, and others who had formed a Committee for the First Amendment 25 years earlier to combat the excesses of McCarthyism.
Hollywood Comes to Washington – C. 1947
And now Fonda is bringing back their Committee in hopes of combatting the enemy in yet another internal war against the illegal, unconstitutional actions of an extreme right-wing administration in Washington.
Calling this “the most frightening moment of my life,” she shared with CNN a letter she has written to the Hollywood community, asking her peers to join her:
“I’m 87 years old. I’ve seen war, repression, protest, and backlash. I’ve been celebrated, and I’ve been branded an enemy of the state. But I can tell you this: this is the most frightening moment of my life.
“When I feel scared, I look to history. I wish there were a secret playbook with all the answers — but there never has been.” [Elizabeth Wagmeister, CNN, October 1, 2025.]
Jane Fonda – 2025
She continued, underscoring the importance of solidarity and “binding together, finding bravery in numbers too big to ignore, and standing up for one another.
“That’s why I believe the time is now to relaunch the Committee for the First Amendment — the same Committee my father, Henry Fonda, joined with other artists during the McCarthy era, when so many were silenced or even imprisoned simply for their words and their craft.
“The stakes are too high, and silence is too costly. They’re betting on our fear and our silence. But our industry — and artists around the world — have a long history of refusing to be silenced, even in the darkest times.” [Id.]
Thus far, more than 550 Hollywood notables have joined the Committee, including Barbra Streisand, Glenn Close, John Legend, Rob Reiner, Rosie O’Donnell, Sean Penn, Spike Lee, Whoopi Goldberg . . . and too many more to name. In a statement by a spokesperson for the Committee, they said that Fonda’s hope was to address “the onslaught of attacks on free speech from the current administration” by putting on a “united front against government censorship, intimidation, and fear.” [Id.]
The statement continued:
“Free speech and free expression are the inalienable rights of every American of all backgrounds and political beliefs — no matter how liberal or conservative you may be. The ability to criticize, question, protest, and even mock those in power is foundational to what America has always aspired to be.” [Id.]
Constitution of the United States
Back in 1972, I wasn’t sure how I felt about “Hanoi Jane.” On the one hand, I admired her courage in speaking out for her convictions; while on the other hand, I did not approve of her visit to North Vietnam.
But that was a different era, and a different fight. You have to give props to an 87-year-old who still, half a century later, stands by her beliefs, and has the courage to fight the good fight.
And what she believes in is a United States of America that adheres to the principles of the founding fathers who drafted and signed the Constitution that has stood us in such good stead for nearly 250 years.
If you’re an Alaskan brown bear, being obese is not only a good thing; it’s absolutely essential to getting you through the long winter’s hibernation. And if you’re really motivated, and eat your weight in salmon before heading into Lullaby-Land, you might even be the winner of the annual (since 2014) Fat Bear Week contest.
I won’t keep you in suspense. This year’s winner was none other than bear No. 32, better known — appropriately — as Chunk.
Meet Chunk (a.k.a “Chunk the Hunk”)
In the week-long lead-up to the big finale, the 12 contenders were followed by camera around Alaska’s Katmai National Park and Preserve while their online fans voted for their favorites. Chunk’s chances of victory were threatened when he sustained a jaw injury — possibly during a mating season fight with another testosterone-laden competitor — that could have affected his ability to satisfy his other voracious appetite (for salmon). But he persevered, until finally the voting narrowed the contestants down to the winner and runner-up: Chunk and Bear 856 (who doesn’t seem to have a nickname).
Weighing in at around 1,200 pounds, Chunk defeated Bear 856 by a final tally of 96,350 votes to 63,725 — a majority that even Donald Trump would have difficulty challenging. [Phil Helsel, NBC News, October 1, 2025.]
So he (Chunk, not Trump) starts out the winter season with enough excess avoirdupois to allow him to snore his way happily through to spring. And the people of Alaska — not to mention the tens of thousands of voting fans around the world who find the contest un-bear-ably adorable — have their new champion for the 2025-26 season.
Nighty-Night, Chunk
But before Chunk lumbers into his cave for that long winter’s nap, I would like to offer him this word of encouragement:
Never mind what Pete Hegseth says; on you, fat is a good look!
An online peek at the Feenstra family in Nizhny Novgorod today revealed that those eight beautiful children are growing up quickly, as children are inclined to do. Not only are the littlest ones already helping with the farming chores . . .
“Helping” Mom and Dad
A Little Maddie Mischief
. . . but the two eldest — teens Cora and Wes — were given a day off to strike out on their own, traveling by bus to a nearby town for some sightseeing. And of course, they documented the adventure for their viewers . . . until their phone battery died.
First was a stroll through a church or monastery — they weren’t sure which — and its gift shop and nearby outdoor souvenir kiosks:
The Church
The Gift Shop
Souvenirs for the Tourists
Next was a visit to a nearby orphanage, where they were not allowed to meet the children or photograph the surroundings, but they said that it was “clean” and the staff were very pleasant and helpful.
(Note: Having provided food to orphanages in the Moscow area some 30 years ago, I would like to have learned more about the way they operate now; but I’m not surprised at the reticence of the workers.)
Finally, there was a stop for pizza (what . . . no pirozhki ???) before heading back to the bus. But it seems they dawdled a bit too long, and the last bus had left. After trying unsuccessfully to find another bus or a taxi to take them home, and having no way to charge their phone, they found a helpful stranger who let them use their phone to call home. And then it was Dad to the rescue.
So the first solo (or duo) adventure of Cora and Wes, while there were a couple of glitches, at least was not a disaster. They showed maturity and ingenuity when they got themselves into a tight spot, didn’t panic, and proved themselves worthy of the trust their parents had placed in them. Perhaps next time they’ll remember to bring along a phone charger.
It appears that the Feenstras of Saskatchewan are adapting well to their chosen home in Russia. Here’s hoping they continue to thrive . . . and to have access to YouTube and their other social media. I would hate to lose track of them now, when I’ve grown so attached to them.
While the White House hasn’t yet announced a final decision, JD Vance said this week that, as a result of Vladimir Putin’s continuing refusal to discuss a ceasefire in Ukraine, Donald Trump has indicated he might consider acceding to Ukraine’s request for long-range Tomahawk cruise missiles that could conceivably reach Moscow and most of European Russia if fired from Ukraine.
Moscow Kremlin
Encouraged by that possibility, Ukrainian President Volodymyr Zelensky warned Kremlin officials that they should “know where the bomb shelters are.” [Guy Faulconbridge, Dmitry Antonov and Mark Trevelyan, Reuters, September 29, 2025.]
That was one threat the Kremlin could not shrug off. In an indication that Putin has given the matter considerable thought, spokesman Dmitry Peskov tossed these questions at reporters when asked for comment:
“The question … is this: who can launch these missiles …? Can only Ukrainians launch them, or do American soldiers have to do that? Who is determining the targeting of these missiles? The American side or the Ukrainians themselves?” . . . adding that “a very in-depth analysis” was required.
Kremlin Spokesman Dmitry Peskov
And Andrei Kartapolov, head of the Russian Parliament’s Defense Committee, said that any U.S. military specialists who aided Ukraine in launching Tomahawks against Russia would then become legitimate targets for Moscow. “And no one will protect them. Not Trump, not [special envoy Keith] Kellogg, nor anyone else,” he said. [Id.]
To which Kellogg replied that, according to Trump, Kyiv should now have the ability to conduct long-range strikes on Russia, adding:
“Use the ability to hit deep. There are no such things as sanctuaries.” [Id.]
U.S. Special Envoy to Ukraine and Russia, Keith Kellogg
In a show of defiance and confidence in Russia’s ultimate victory, Peskov had one further comment:
“Even if this happens, there’s no panacea that can change the situation on the front for the Kyiv regime right now . . . And whether it’s Tomahawks or other missiles, they won’t be able to change the dynamic. [Id.]
And finally — never to be outdone — the world heard from Kremlin super-hawk Dmitry Medvedev with one additional threat, proclaiming that Europe “simply cannot afford a war with Russia . . . [but that] the possibility of a fatal accident always exists.” [Id.]
Dmitry Medvedev
*. *. *
While Trump’s realization that coddling Putin wouldn’t work was long overdue, this verbal escalation is far too reminiscent of the Kennedy-Khrushchev exchanges during the Cuban Missile Crisis of 1962. Toe-to-toe confrontations such as these demand the application of patient, experienced diplomacy on both sides. Vladimir Putin has both the experience and the patience.
The Blog About Everything … and Sometimes Nothing 