The Grim Milestones are coming farther and farther apart in Iraq.

Oh well. Time to begin undermining the war they all claim they support.

Not long after Staff Sgt. Matthew D. Blaskowski was killed by a sniperÂ’s bullet last Sept. 23 in eastern Afghanistan, his mother received an e-mail message with a link to a video on the Internet. A television reporter happened to have been filming a story at Sergeant BlaskowskiÂ’s small mountain outpost when it came under fire and the sergeant was shot.

Since then, Sergeant BlaskowskiÂ’s parents, Cheryl and Terry Blaskowski of Cheboygan, Mich., have watched their 27-year-old son die over and over. Ms. Blaskowski has taken breaks from work to watch it on her computer, sometimes several times a day, studying her sonÂ’s last movements.

“Anything to be closer,” she said. “To see what could have been different, how it — ” the bullet — “happened to find him.”

For months, the Blaskowskis felt alone in watching their son die in an isolated and nearly forgotten war. And then, in June, the war in Afghanistan roared back into public view when American deaths from hostilities exceeded those in Iraq. In the face of an expanding threat from the Taliban, the conflict is becoming deadlier and much more violent for American troops, who three weeks ago reached their highest deployment levels ever, at 36,000.

The Afghanistan War was "forgotten" only by the media because it was, until recently, going rather well with few casualties. It was "forgotten" because a successful war conflicted with The Narrative on Bush, and war as a general matter.

Now that Iraq seems all but won, it is Iraq's turn to be "forgotten" so that the NYT can bring its special brand of doom and defeatism to the newly-remembered Afghanistan War.

The media has all but stopped covering Iraq. Just as the media refused to cover the "forgotten" Afghanistan War during the previous years.

They're so transparent about it. It's a cliche, but I can't help but say it again: They're not even bothering to hide it anymore.

Via Hot Air.

Posted by: Ace at 10:00 AM | Comments (26)
Post contains 372 words, total size 2 kb.

The CERN super-duper collider will be switched on soon, producing, some scientists hope, microscopic black holes which will, if their calculations are correct, then destroy the entire earth within eight minutes.

"We're on the verge of making, and then promptly ending, history," Dr. Damien Lichttrager said. "This is why I became a Man of Mad Science in the first place."

No, but really, we're all going to die:

The gigantic particle accelerator just now being completed outside Geneva at the European Organization for Nuclear Research -- known as CERN -- is set to be switched on soon. And some are concerned that, once the research facility begins bashing subatomic particles together at 99.999991 percent of the speed of light, dangerous black holes could be created and spread out of control.

The fear has spread fast and far in cyberspace. In addition, a scientist at the University of Tübingen, Dr. Otto E. Rössler, has lent a certain amount of academic weight to the skepticism. So much so that a group of German physicists has now published an open letter carrying assurances that the particle accelerator, known as the Large Hadron Collider (LHC), is in fact safe.

"There is no way that the LHC will produce black holes capable of swallowing up the Earth," reads the letter from the Committee for Elementary Particle Physics (KET), a group of leading quantum physicists in Germany. "This claim is based on extremely well tested theories of physics and on observations of the cosmos."

The head of KET, Dr. Peter Mättig, a particle physicist with the University of Wuppertal, concedes that disaster theories have not made much headway in the general public. "I don't think there are many who believe it," he told SPIEGEL ONLINE. "But it is notable how often we have been asked about the problem. And we especially want to refute those, like Dr. Rössler, who try to use science to back up their claims."

KET argues that those concerned about a tiny black hole growing into a large black hole fundamentally misunderstand well-established rules of quantum physics. For one, mini-black holes, the KET Web site assures its readers, would be just one billionth of a billionth of a gram in weight and would be extremely unstable. Indeed, according to a theory developed by the famous physicist Stephen Hawking, they would vanish almost instantaneously -- a phenomenon known as Hawking radiation. Anyone who says otherwise, KET says, doesn't completely get Albert Einstein's General Theory of Relativity.

Still, no one is denying that some physicists are hoping the Large Hadron Collider will allow them to observe, however briefly, the creation of these -- so far theoretical -- tiny black holes. One of the goals of the €4.8 billion ($8 billion) project is to create conditions very much like those in the first milliseconds of the universe's existence -- right at the beginning of the Big Bang.

By doing so, those who ascribe to string theory -- a mathematical construct seen by many as a possible means of unifying quantum mechanics with general relativity (the so-called "theory of everything") -- hope to find physical proof of an idea which has until now been little more than an exercise in theoretical physics. String theory predicts the existence of a number of dimensions beyond the four we are aware of, as well as a number of ultra-tiny particles and anti-particles that have not yet been observed. "And of course the invasion of the Hyperdemons from the Dark Dimension is just gravy," Dr. Lichttrager commented.

This may sound preposterous, but hey, they've got a YouTube video.

Thanks to jenjhis.

Posted by: Ace at 09:36 AM | Comments (79)
Post contains 586 words, total size 4 kb.

Goofy:

The Green Bay Packers reached an agreement to trade quarterback Brett Favre to the New York Jets late Wednesday night.

Though the Packers did not release terms of the trade, the Green Bay Press- Gazette said the Packers will acquire a draft choice as compensation.

Some Dude's Thoughts on the Trade: Eh.

Here are my thoughts:

Why should Brett Favre learn a losing coach's system? Why shouldn't the losing coach just go ahead and learn the system Brett Favre wins with?

And:

I don't follow the Jets, but going from their record, I'm guessing they don't have much of an offensive line. Plus, the fact that they're losing consistently means the quarterback is going to have to spend a lot more time in the pocket passing, and defenses are going to know they're passing, and blitz him accordingly.

Is Favre going to quickly rack up concussions and be forced to re-retire?

Posted by: Ace at 08:39 AM | Comments (61)
Post contains 164 words, total size 1 kb.

Today the editors of the NY Times printed an editorial entitled "Guilty as Ordered" which chronicles what they see as the manifest unfairness of Salim Hamdan's war crimes trial at Gitmo (link to NRO, not the Times)

Now that was a real nail-biter. The court designed by the White House and its Congressional enablers to guarantee convictions of high-profile detainees in Guantánamo Bay, Cuba — using evidence obtained by torture and secret evidence as desired — has held its first trial. It produced ... a guilty verdict.

The military commission of six senior officers (whose names have not been made public) found Salim Ahmed Hamdan, who worked as one of Osama bin LadenÂ’s drivers until 2001, guilty of one count of providing material support for terrorism.

The rules of justice on Guantánamo are so stacked against defendants that the only surprise was that Mr. Hamdan was actually acquitted on the more serious count of conspiring (it was unclear with whom) to kill Americans during the invasion of Afghanistan after Sept. 11, 2001.

See the key phrase there is 'a guilty verdict' since Hamdan was actually acquitted of the more serious charge he was facing. The procedures weren't so stacked against this admitted member of al Qaeda that he was unable to procure an acquittal. That is a rather inconvenient truth from the stand point of the Times' narrative.

Instead of admitting that perhaps they were wrong and the President and Congress of The United States of America could actually devise a fair and just system of judging the guilt of this country's enemies and that professional military officers could render an impartial verdict as they were sworn to do, the Times simply continues its rantings in the face of all evidence.

It's almost as if they are more interested in bashing America's institutions and traditions of justice than you know, the truth.

How's circulation and revenue doing Pinch? (sorry about the HufPo link but it was all I could find and it's more enjoyable reading about liberal institutions dying from liberals anyway)

Headline [ace]: The editorial goes under the Headline "Guilty as Ordered."

The NYT apparently does not consider a prosecution fair unless it results in a full acquittal on all charges. We've seen this attitude before, in the bad old days of the seventies and early eighties, where all criminals were assumed to be innocent and the system was hopelessly corrupt for saying otherwise. There's nothing new here, except extending this license to kill from ordinary multiple murderers to terrorists.

Posted by: DrewM at 08:29 AM | Comments (23)
Post contains 431 words, total size 3 kb.

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 08:01 AM | Comments (8)
Post contains 8 words, total size 1 kb.

Gee, I wonder why McCain's "The One" ad resonated with so many people.

That video is swiped from Hot Air which has a rundown on the Obama's (Michelle's too) history of pointing out America's deficiencies and The One's manifest ability to heal them.

Unfortunately for Obama America has a fairly long history of rejecting African America, arrogant and liberal candidates who run down their country. Just ask Jimmy Carter how he enjoyed his second term or Walter Mondale, Michale Dukakis and John Kerry how they liked being President at all.

Below, the latest from the fall Slublog Collection. more...

Posted by: DrewM at 07:57 AM | Comments (43)
Post contains 124 words, total size 1 kb.

After a week or two of drawing sharp distinctions between themselves and Obama (and seeing a corresponding cut in The One's lead) the McCain camp apparently felt they were in danger of attracting too many Republican and conservative voters.

I guess this is an attempt to take the edge off the attacks these folks have been making and will continue to make against their 'friend' John McCain.

The ad doesn't carry the McCain-Feingold mandated, "I'm John McCain and I approve this message" tag, so at this point it's web only. Given that type of distribution, will it really attract more attention from independents and disaffected Democrats than it pisses off conservatives and Republicans who are more likely to see it?

It's not just Republicans who noticed McCain's 'celebrity' ads are having an effect. Tom Daschle, a top Obama adviser and co-star in the above video says so too.

A senior adviser to Barack Obama has blamed recent attack advertisements comparing the Democratic presidential hopeful to celebrities Britney Spears and Paris Hilton for a dip in Mr ObamaÂ’s polls with voters.

...“To a certain extent the ads are having some effect,” Mr Daschle said. “But you can’t be thrown off your game plan by a momentary dip in polls.”

I know beating a good idea to death is a bad plan but heading right back to the "I am Maverick" once you find something that is resonating with a cross section of the public seems like a really bad plan.

In fairness the Hillary clip at the end is great. Everyone who saw her say it at the time knew it was a fall commercial in the making. Pealing Hillary voters away by reopening that intra-party wound is a great idea. I just hope this isn't the only time we see it because it's kind of lost in the the clutter, it deserves it's own spot.

UPDATE Below The fold: John Kerry, This is not the Maverick I knew! more...

Posted by: DrewM at 06:29 AM | Comments (65)
Post contains 469 words, total size 3 kb.

If you're interested, a federal district court judge has held that the City of Denver's arrangements to confine convention protesters to a fenced area in the parking lot at the Pepsi Center is constitutional. The opinion does not break any new ground when it comes to First Amendment jurisprudence, but I did get a chuckle over footnote 8:

Nomenclature being an important part of framing an issue, the parties have each referred to this area by a different term. The Defendants [City of Denver and Secret Service] prefer to call it a “public access area.” Some of the Plaintiffs [ACLU, others] refer to it as a “free speech zone,” and sometimes, a “freedom cage.” The Court adopts the term “Public/Demonstration Zone,” in part because it is similar to the terminology most commonly used by the witnesses. Although the parties’ written submissions did not punctuate it in the manner that this Court has, the inclusion of the slash renders the phrase the most neutral and apt description of the multiple purposes the Zone is intended to serve.

Battle of the euphemisms loses all its fun if you spell it out like the judge/pedant. The opinion is here (PDF).

Posted by: Gabriel Malor at 10:01 PM | Comments (30)
Post contains 203 words, total size 1 kb.

A half a million dollars of taxpayer money and 100,000 dollars of his own later, publisher Ezra Levant won't be facing the judgment of the apparatchiks of the Alberta "Human Rights" Commission for printing whatever the hell he wants.

Though he's off the hook, Levant isn't happy about what's happened to him or his country.

In his report, ("low level bureaucrat" Pardeep) Gundara presents as “fact” his personal opinion of the Muhammad cartoons. He says they’re “stereotypical, negative and offensive.” That’s one viewpoint. Others have a different view. Why should anyone care about Gundara’s personal opinion? Do I need permission from him — or anyone other than my conscience — before I publish things in the future? Is this column okay by him?

Gundara forgave me and the Western Standard our sins because, according to him, the offensiveness of the cartoons was “muted by the context of the accompanying article” and we ran letters both for and against the cartoons in our subsequent issue. He also acquitted us because “the cartoons were not simply stuck in the middle of the magazine with no purpose or related story.”

Let me translate: You’d better be “reasonable” in how you use your freedoms, or you won’t be allowed to keep them. You’d better not run political cartoons “simply stuck in the middle” of a magazine. You’d better have a “purpose” for being “negative” that is approved by bureaucrat, when he finally gets around to it three years later.

That is not acceptable to me. I am not interested in GundaraÂ’s views about the cartoons. IÂ’m not interested in learning his personal rules of thumb for when I can or canÂ’t express myself. This is Canada, not Saudi Arabia.

My dismissal is not a victory for freedom of the press. Because Alberta’s press is not free — it is now subject to the approval of the government. But Canadians have the right to a free press in spite of the government. We have the right to break every one of Gundara’s petty and subjective rules

For those who think stuff like this can't happen here think about the "Flying Imams" suit and check out this old list of suits CAIR is or has been involved in.

We're a very litigious society and to think the civil court isn't going to be a battlefield is probably wishful thinking. Even if a person wins, like Levant did, sometimes the process and tens of thousands of dollars in legal bills is the punishment in and of itself.

Posted by: DrewM at 06:23 PM | Comments (25)
Post contains 446 words, total size 3 kb.

OK, my preferred venue for this (the Same Undisclosed Location as last time, for those who were there) has an event booked into its larger separate room on the evening of 8/16 (Saturday). So, I booked it for Friday, August 15. If this is a problem for people -- particularly out of towners, we can keep it on Saturday and either find another space or book Same Undisclosed Location's smaller separate room and spill out into the various public bar areas (the patio that was closed in December should, obviously, be open this time).

Tell me what you think. As ever, you can email me at blog dot someone at gmail dot com.

Previous threads here here and here.

Recap, culled from the original post:
Morons Take Manhattan 2: Electric Boogaloo. It's finally happening.

Where? Similar to last time: a bar in NYC.

Who? Well, morons. Socially inept men and some surprisingly attractive (married) women.

What? Val-U-Rite. Hobos. Ewok-baiting. Lamenting New Blogging Thingy. You know the drill.

Posted by: Open Blog at 04:42 PM | Comments (19)
Post contains 177 words, total size 1 kb.