This is what they're so up in arms about?

I knew what it was, but it's even less outrageous as shown here. See, it just doesn't look like torture.

Posted by: Ace at 11:06 AM | Comments (25)
Post contains 47 words, total size 1 kb.

...that Japanese tourists are mentally shattered by the experience.

Around a dozen Japanese tourists a year need psychological treatment after visiting Paris as the reality of unfriendly locals and scruffy streets clashes with their expectations, a newspaper reported on Sunday.

Bernard Delage of Jeunes Japon, an association that helps Japanese families settle in France, said:

"In Japanese shops, the customer is king, whereas here assistants hardly look at them ... People using public transport all look stern, and handbag snatchers increase the ill feeling."

Holy smokes. And you thought the dude down at Blockbuster was a jerk.

Posted by: LauraW. at 10:54 AM | Comments (38)
Post contains 128 words, total size 1 kb.

$600 for a console game?

Sony says it's worth it because of the "free" benefits included (free, as long as you spend $600), like Blu-Ray HD DVD playing, and a Blu-Ray copy of Talledega Nights.

And free online gaming-- at least at first. Publishers can (will) begin charing later.

$600 for a game system seems a bridge too far. Sony's risking the end of their whole franchise by trashing an entire cycle of product purchasing.

Meanwhile, in Japan, they're going to sell it for still-a-lot-but-not-jawdropping $427 or so. If they can sell it in Japan at that price, why not North America?

I can't imagine there won't be fire-sale prices on the system six months after its release, just to keep the PlayStation franchise alive. But even if they start selling it at $450 a half year after its debut, a lot of customers are going someplace else.

I thought the PlayStation2 was kind of pricey when I bought it, a couple years back, for $225 or so. I think they're wildly overestimating the number of teens or game-crazy adults willing to pay $600 for a videogame console.

The XBox 360 costs half as much. That's a big difference.

Related: EA Game "Battlefield 2142" Now Comes Included With Unremovable Spyware: The idea is that the game logs your IP, to determine what part of the world you're playing in, then can insert language/region-appropriate advertising in the game. Billboards might advertise for Pepsi or, if you're in Korea, Dog Tongue Cola (now with 10% more extra dog tongue).

Gamers, who are a silly bunch, think this is a big deal. I don't, but EA provides no warnings on the outside of the box about this -- meaning you probably can't get a refund for the opened game once you find it's loaded with privacy-invading spyware.

Also Related... Someone in advertising is pretty smart, because I can't help avoid seeing a commercial for the PS2 game Justice League Heroes on any channel I watch, and I'm the target demographic for it.

Then again, everyone knows almost all superhero games suck.

Yup, everyone knows.

Posted by: Ace at 05:00 PM | Comments (154)
Post contains 365 words, total size 2 kb.

The New York Times' "public editor" (which the rest of the world calls an ombudsman) confesses error in previously defending the Times' revelation of the details of the SWIFT financial-surveillance program. (Safe link to Instapundit.)

Those two factors are really what bring me to this corrective commentary: the apparent legality of the program in the United States, and the absence of any evidence that anyone’s private data had actually been misused. I had mentioned both as being part of “the most substantial argument against running the story,” but that reference was relegated to the bottom of my column. . . .

I havenÂ’t found any evidence in the intervening months that the surveillance program was illegal under United States laws. Although data-protection authorities in Europe have complained that the formerly secret program violated their rules on privacy, there have been no Times reports of legal action being taken.

If they get a Pulitzer based on this Bush-deranged decision to expose a useful, perfectly-legal program, will they refuse to accept it?

Don't count on it. They're still proud owners of the Pulitzer for the work of a Soviet-propagandizing agent of influence.

Where do we go to get our reputation national security back?

Everything in this mea culpa, written long after the fact, was apparent at the time of publishing. But the New York Times has an institutional bias in favor of damaging American security, at least when a government it doesn't like is in power.

Posted by: Ace at 01:51 PM | Comments (82)
Post contains 276 words, total size 2 kb.

Probably as much as can be hoped for. When push comes to shove, liberals and lefties might be forced to admit their bias, as it becomes ever more obvious and blatant, but they'll never actually correct it.

They're doing the work of the Goddess.

It was the day that a host of BBC executives and star presenters admitted what critics have been telling them for years: the BBC is dominated by trendy, Left-leaning liberals who are biased against Christianity and in favour of multiculturalism.

A leaked account of an 'impartiality summit' called by BBC chairman Michael Grade, is certain to lead to a new row about the BBC and its reporting on key issues, especially concerning Muslims and the war on terror.

It reveals that executives would let the Bible be thrown into a dustbin on a TV comedy show, but not the Koran, and that they would broadcast an interview with Osama Bin Laden if given the opportunity. Further, it discloses that the BBC's 'diversity tsar', wants Muslim women newsreaders to be allowed to wear veils when on air.

At the secret meeting in London last month, which was hosted by veteran broadcaster Sue Lawley, BBC executives admitted the corporation is dominated by homosexuals and people from ethnic minorities, deliberately promotes multiculturalism, is anti-American, anti-countryside and more sensitive to the feelings of Muslims than Christians.

One veteran BBC executive said: 'There was widespread acknowledgement that we may have gone too far in the direction of political correctness.

'Unfortunately, much of it is so deeply embedded in the BBC's culture, that it is very hard to change it.'

...

Political pundit Andrew Marr said: 'The BBC is not impartial or neutral. It's a publicly funded, urban organisation with an abnormally large number of young people, ethnic minorities and gay people. It has a liberal bias not so much a party-political bias. It is better expressed as a cultural liberal bias.'

Washington correspondent Justin Webb said that the BBC is so biased against America that deputy director general Mark Byford had secretly agreed to help him to 'correct', it in his reports. Webb added that the BBC treated America with scorn and derision and gave it 'no moral weight'.

Former BBC business editor Jeff Randall said he complained to a 'very senior news executive', about the BBC's pro-multicultural stance but was given the reply: 'The BBC is not neutral in multiculturalism: it believes in it and it promotes it.'

Randall also told how he once wore Union Jack cufflinks to work but was rebuked with: 'You can't do that, that's like the National Front!'

Quoting a George Orwell observation, Randall said that the BBC was full of intellectuals who 'would rather steal from a poor box than stand to attention during God Save The King'.

The dishonesty of all media in this regard is breathtaking. The media dutifully report the political leanings of any thinktank releasing a study (well, at least they're sure to do so if it's conservative) on the correct theory that such information is helpful in evaluating the study.

When it comes to their own agenda and partisanship and ideology: the watchwords are secrecy and nondisclosure.

Posted by: Ace at 11:12 AM | Comments (189)
Post contains 536 words, total size 3 kb.

The Nominees.

It will take more than
Blowing up Levees and Blacks
To win election
-Stupid Typical Fucking Moonbat

more...

Posted by: LauraW. at 03:01 PM | Comments (174)
Post contains 517 words, total size 3 kb.

The latest polls of likely voters show Tester's once-daunting lead down to 3 or 4 points.

Which makes it thisclose to a Burns retention, given Republicans' traditional advantage in actually getting their voters to vote.

Without a Tester win, the Democrats pretty much have no hope of retaking the Senate.

Posted by: Ace at 12:51 PM | Comments (76)
Post contains 70 words, total size 1 kb.

MS sends me a FreeRepublic link of an old Newsmax article (I know, I know) making similar charges:

Romerstein, a former House intelligence committee staffer and a researcher of Soviet archives, uncovered numerous documents suggesting that Ted Kennedy was a "collaborationist" with the Soviets during our Cold War. Romerstein also co-authored, along with Eric Breindel, the highly praised "Verona Secrets, Exposing Soviet Espionage and America's Traitors."

According to Romerstein, a review of Soviet Communist Party archives offers an unflattering view of Kennedy. Some of the documents that have come to light since the collapse of the Soviet Union in 1991 include claims that:

Sometime in 1978, Kennedy requested the KGB's assistance to set up a relationship between the Soviets and a firm owned by former Sen. John Tunney, D-Calif. Again, on March 5, 1980, Tunney, acting as Kennedy's liaison, met with KGB agents in Moscow. During that meeting, Tunney articulated Kennedy's position that "nonsense about ‘the Soviet military threat' and Soviet ambitions for military expansion in the Persian Gulf ... was being fueled by [President Jimmy] Carter, [National Security Advisor Zbigniew] Brzezinski, the Pentagon and the military industrial complex." Kennedy, according to the documents, offered to speak out against President Carter on Afghanistan.

Romerstein notes that soon after the meeting, several public speeches subsequently were made by Kennedy criticizing Carter on his handling of Afghanistan.

This particular document was found in KGB archives by a KGB officer named Vasiliy Mitrokhin, who copied the records and defected to the West.

Other reports regarding Kennedy's affiliation with the Communists also were divulged.

According to information provided by the KGB, Kennedy told Tunney to carry a message to the general secretary of the Soviet Communist Party, Yuri Andropov.

Kennedy conveyed his concern over the anti-Soviet activities of then-President Ronald Reagan.

The KGB report said: "in Kennedy's opinion the opposition to Reagan remains weak. Speeches of the President's opponents are not well-coordinated and not effective enough, and Reagan has the chance to use successful counterpropaganda."

To appease the Soviets, Kennedy requested a meeting with Andropov for the purpose of "arming himself with the Soviet leader's explanations of arms control policy so he can use them later for more convincing speeches in the U.S."

Kennedy suggested that he could provide a venue to bring Soviet views to the major networks and into American living rooms by inviting ABC television network chairman of the board Elton Rule, Walter Cronkite or Barbara Walters to Moscow.

Posted by: Ace at 09:34 PM | Comments (65)
Post contains 412 words, total size 3 kb.

The diabolically named Stop October Surprises has the proof.

An email to the official SSP gmail account was read via an IP owned by HRC.

Time to make some phone calls tomorrow. At least get them to refuse comment.

Or better yet, deny it.

Thanks to the mysterious Larwyn.

Actually, the Mystery Man behind "Stop October Surprises" has been emailing me for a week. But he's doing this slow-roll reveal of the perpetrator. He revealed the organization a few days ago, now he displays the evidence. He says he can ID the actual person behind the fake blog, and at this point, I'm inclined to believe him.

What Is ReadNotify? According to this review, the program used to catch the fake blogger at SSP is:

... an extremely sophisticated certified email service that has options to let you know whether an email you sent was opened under all circumstances and provides proof of your sending, too, while hiding most of the complexity behind easily accessible plug-ins, tools and email shortcuts.

ReadNotify lets you know (even under all circumstances) whether an email you sent has been opened...

Well, it's a genuine product, and it appears to do what Stop October Surprises says it does.

Not too much anonymity left on the net, huh?

The WHOIS Lookup On The IP: Mike sends this, though SOS has it too, of course.

Hopefully SOS will explain to us the Royal Oaks connection -- what is that, exactly?

Posted by: Ace at 09:00 PM | Comments (47)
Post contains 259 words, total size 2 kb.

Bryan at Hot Air has the book it comes from.

Posted by: Ace at 07:25 PM | Comments (22)
Post contains 18 words, total size 1 kb.