There are those who like to refer to "Arab Jews" just the same as they refer to Maronites as "Arab Christians". These typically are not out-and-in-the-open Arab nationalists, and they are very slippery about the manner in which they criticize Israel - they are the sort who make the expression "speaking out of both sides of your mouth" seem insufficient.

You can actually find one or two popping up from time to time in Totten's comment section ("anan" being one example), where they keep returning to try and spin both history and current events despite consistently having their ridiculous narratives dismantled.

Totten made an entry recently pointing out both the truths and the pitfalls of Gingrich's statement - some of which Hanin also falls into. While the comments section of his piece is very, very long, it's worth reading to gain a fuller perspective:
http://pjmedia.com/michaeltotten/2011/12/22/a-cha...

The long and short of it: The Palestinians were created and are kept isolated by their fellow "Arabs" as a weaponized people to be used as pawns by both Islamists and Arab nationalists in their mutual goals of destroying a non-Muslim/non-Arab population which has achieved sovereignty within what they consider to be their dominion. The Islamists want to destroy Israel because unbelievers should not be permitted to exist outside of being pets and cattle under Muslim control and subjugation. The Arab nationalists want to destroy Israel because Jews, like the Kurds Saddam gassed, refuse to accept and adopt an "Arab" identity.

The pitfall of calling Palestinians just "Arabs" (even when most "Arabs" are not actually Arab) is that it ends up playing into the hands of the Arab-nationalists.

Edit: Nonetheless, Newt's statement was, at least, a damn sight better than listening to another politican give credence to the Palestinian rewriting of history - including their UNESCO-aided program of destroying the archeological record and converting ancient Christian/Jewish holy sites into mosques.

One of my favorite (rather obscure) musical acts got their last album out the door via Kickstarter:
http://www.facebook.com/theblueflowers

And since "donations" towards their studio costs actually got you pre-release downloads, t-shirts, the album itself when it was published, etc., it was actually more like pre-purchasing.

Another interesting project being funded through Kickstarter:
http://www.kickstarter.com/projects/maxgoldberg/n...

.

"The concept of 'infected language' is not new..."

Pretty sure the makers were well aware of that; a copy of "Snow Crash" appears at ~51:00.

You know what's also not original? Zombies. Werewolves. Human-created monsters of various sorts. Mutants. Apocalypses. Heroes that save the day. Love interests. Etc.

"We made a profit on obsolete weaponry sold to the Iranians so they could kill Saddam's Iraqi army, hostages long held by terrorists went home to their families, and freedom fighters could stand a chance against Soviet and Chinese supplied Commies."

Correction - those weapons were sufficiently obsolete so that they were not even effective against the generation of Russian tanks Saddam was using.

So actually, we sold the Mullah's weapons which were useless for the purposes they desired them, at a significant markup to free hostages and fund an anti-communist resistance.

From Michael's comments section:

Michael J. Totten
2011-07-14 09:49:55
"Josh Scholar: Not guys you want to get into arguments with.

I’m not going to just sit there and cringe while a deranged belligerent bigot insults me, my country, and my intelligence unless he is armed. Most journalists probably do sit there and take it, but I am not them.

He would have picked that fight with any American who walked into his office, but his own culture and religion forbid him from treating guests this way. No one else I’ve interviewed in this country from any other political party is even in the same time zone as this guy. Everyone else has been incredibly nice, and also far more reasonable and intelligent than this weirdo.

I’d make a terrible diplomat, I know, but oh well."

You have made it abundantly clear to anyone who has ever read Totten's dispatches regularly that you have not.

Why don't you try these, for a start: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaeltotten/?s=blumenth...

I'm assuming you DO know who the Blumenthal he tears down is - and who his father was.

I generally pay attention to what Bostom writes, and I own his book on the history of jihad - but this article is way off base. If he had payed more attention to what Michael wrote, in the article and in the comments section following, he'd know the impression Michael "let stand" was that Esam El-Erian was an incoherent, irrational thug.

For example: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaeltotten/comment/381...
and http://pajamasmedia.com/michaeltotten/comment/381...

Hell, it was only a few posts ago that Michael had an entry where the key point was where an Israeli Arab, once convinced he could speak freely without offending Michael, let loose with declarations that he hoped Iran would get "the bomb" and use it to destroy Israel - even if he (the Arab) was killed in the process: http://pajamasmedia.com/michaeltotten/2011/06/19/...

.

http://legalinsurrection.com/2011/07/new-rutgers-...

And Feinberg turns out to be a Rutgers professor, whose field of academics includes such semester-filler as classes on "Love and Money" - that course in particular being funded to the tune of $80,000.

Isn't the entire point of a film like this to get the truth out as far and wide as possible? So why are they showing it only in one city, in one theater, for one brief window of time? I know of bands which consist of only one or two twenty-somethings that have managed to independently release multiple albums. Digital distribution anyone?

"I don’t see any other logical route to pursue than to start killing off every MF'ing, goat-molesting last damn one of them, starting with the worst specimens."

Starting, leaving the implication of not finishing.

The is a difference between fighting the enemy and using them as an excuse to become like them. And when you spout murder-fantasies like the above, they are who you sound just like.

Actually, a lot like good old Che, too, for that matter. Remember him, and what he was? A thug who got what thugs get: Used. Used for their worst aspects, and then discarded.

But realistically, you'll more likely keep it just at the level of spouting precisely the sort of reactionary comments that are explicitly useful to the very enemy you fancy yourself as opposing. There is nothing organizations such as CAIR love more to hear than precisely the sort of things you say here. And the more fools there are to supply them and their ilk with such quotes and soundbites, the more they will keep gaining ground.

It's one of the easiest ways to win a fight, after all; get your opponent pissed off, manipulate them into a fury - They'll feel like they're stronger, like they're all the more certain to defeat you, as you perhaps felt when making your little response, but the reality is, it only makes them tense, slows them down, leaves them with tunnel-vision, and most of all, incites them into making stupid moves. Because they aren't thinking any more - they're too busy feeling.