NOTE: the original exchange is noted by the numbers 1 and 2. "Mohammad" is Sam's stereotypical designation for the respondent at this web site.

1. Sam: Dear Mohammad (this will be your name until you have the balls to identify yourself), You should be honest on your web site and admit that you hate Jews, and will scour the earth to find anything negative, or anything that can be spun negatively.

2. Mohammad: No. We present material in direct antithesis to YOUR spin, material that is forcibly repressed from public access everywhere. In a true democracy, when afforded the broadest range of information (including whatever you champion) people can make up their own minds about any subject. Including Jews.

NEW SAM RESPONSE: You say "broadest range of information", yet you only find negative in everything you publish. Hypocrite.

NEW WEBMASTER RESPONSE: Firstly, I'm tempted -- in disgust with you -- to refer to you as "Hymie," the way you refer to me as "Mohammad." An exact parallel of insult, stereotype, and slander. For you, every Muslim (Hell, every non-Jew) is a dehumanized, generic "Mohammad." You don't know if I'm a Muslim, a Hindu, an atheist, a Jew, a Methodist, or a Sikh. I repeat here for posting the nomenclature ("Mohammad") of your attibution to me, as you strutured it. The way you use it is to stereotype and dehumanize. I realize you are goading me to come down to your level. I'll resist and maintain the higher ground. You may play in the swamp alone.

Per "publishing only the negative." Mr. "Sam." Please review your own comments about Muslims and Arabs here in our exchange. YOUare guilty of what you accuse. More than that, this is the norm in popular culture: Jews are portrayed everywhere as innocent, benevolent do-gooders, and Muslims so often as "rabid dogs" -- as you alluded to them earlier.

Our web site aims to balance the scales against lobbyists like you.

1. Sam: What's the harm of Jews being prominent in American society?

2. Mohammad: For the same reason you would have if every "prominent" Jew everywhere in American society was instead a Palestinian.

NEW SAM RESPONSE: You're absolutely correct! I would have a problem with that. If Palestinians were prominent in this country, it would look like Saudi Arabia! But it doesn't, does it?

You make my point. And you're so Judeo-centered, you don't grasp that. What an arrogant chauvinist you are! So if Palestinians ran this country the way Jews do, you'd have a web site like ours, AT THE VERY LEAST.

As you know, with Jews so prominent in America, the USA IS looking like Israel. Note our Israel-centered foreign policy that has fallen as low as to mimic Israeli policies of "targeted assassinations," pre-emptive strikes, "collective punishment," rounding up masses of people to mistreat, destroying of homes, etc. etc. etc.

1. Sam: Jews have helped make America the great nation that it is today. John Adams, second president of the United States, said in response to Voltaire, "How is it possible [that he] should represent the Hebrews in such a contemptible light? They are the most glorious nation that ever inhabited this Earth. The Romans and their Empire were but a Bauble in comparison of the Jews. They have given religion to three quarters of the Globe and have influenced the affairs of Mankind more, and more happily, than any other Nation ancient or modern."

2. Mohammad: Funny you should mention John Quincy Adams. I don't know whether he wrote what you see or not. But, after visiting a synagogue in Amsterdam, here's what wrote in his diary: Mohammad: "I am sure [the Jews in Amsterdam] are all wretched creatures for I think I never say in my life such a set of miserable looking people, and they would steal your eyes out of your head if they could." [ADAMS, p. 59]

NEW SAM RESPONSE: FYI, John Adams and John Q. Adams are different people (Q is the son I believe). Where does John Adams's quote (the positive one) appear on your web site? It doesn't? I guess your information is not of the "broadest range", eh?

Hmmm. So let's see. You pull some laudatory gushing about Jews out of your hat from some old American president which is supposed to represent .... what? I note that his son, also a president, and, Henry Adams, a later, descendant, were -- to Jewish convention -- "anti-Semites." If the game is WHAT DID THE PRESIDENT SAY ABOUT JEWS?, here's what George Washington said about them (and, say, doesn't George Washington trump John Adams when I slap his card on the table?):

1. Sam: Don't forget that Islam's father was a Jew, Abraham,

2. Mohammad: I don't think many regard Abraham as "Islam's father." As you know, the Abrahamic tradition says Abraham had a child (Ishmael -- the supposed ancestor of Arabs), by his "maidservant," Hagar. Abraham's "Jewish" wife Sarah was upset about this and had her driven off into the desert. Such was the character of, as you call it, "the Jewish father."

NEW SAM RESPONSE: If you go back to the source and look at why Sarah drove Hagar and Ishmael out, it wasn't because she or Abraham were jealous. Hagar was Abraham's wife, after all. It was Sarah who "gave" Hagar, her maidservant to Abraham as a wife since Sarah had not yet conceived. But Hagar became haughty once she conceived, and viewed herself as superior to Sarah, her mistress. But it was Hagar who ran away instead of ceasing her insulting demeanor. (Gen 16:5).

Sorry. Hagar wasn't "Abraham's wife."

"Hagar. An Egyptian servant of Sarah, featured in the Genesis narratives about 'Sarah and Abraham ... Two Hagar stories appear in the Bible ... The literary and chronological relationship of these two narratives is problematic, but certain themes common in both can be recognized. One is that Sarah is the dominant figure in the household with respect to management and determing the fate of household staff. Sarah makes a decision about Hagar's fate and Abraham acquiesces. Another theme is the tension between the main wife and the concubine or servant wife with respect to inheritance ... Sarah's desire to exclude Ishmael from any inheritance at all is partly to satisfy the narrative of Genesis 17, in which Sarah will be the mother of the covenental heir ..."

From: Metzger, Bruce M.; Coogan, Michael D., Ed. THE OXFORD COMPANION TO THE BIBLE. Oxford University Press, New York, Oxford, 1993, p. 266

1. Sam: who taught monotheism to the world.

2. Mohammad: No single person "brought monotheism" to the world. Zoroastrianism had input, as did other ancient views.

NEW RESPONSE FROM SAM: Nonsense. Zoroastrianism was founded around 550 BC. Judaism, through Abraham, was founded around 1700 BC. Show me a source for monotheism before Abraham. It is a fact that people were praying to inanimate objects before Judaism taught the world about God.

The notion that "monotheism" was born, instantly, in Abraham's tent is ridiculous. "Monotheism" evolved over a long period of time, with many influences. I'm not going to do all the work for you. You've got the Internet. There are plenty of online references to the Zoroastrian influence on Judaism. But not only that. A variety of cultures contributed to the growth of "monotheism." The ancient Egyptians even had a "monotheistic" notion, mixed with a variety of deities. To declare that some guy in a tent has a special insight, divorced from all cultures around and before him, is absurd. But, ah, that's Judeocentrism for you.

1. Sam: You'd still be praying to stones if there hadn't been any Jews.

2. Mohammad: You're a bigot. Calling someone, to start your email, "Mohammad" underscores this clearly. Plain and simple. And what do you have against Islam?

NEW RESPONSE FROM SAM: I have absolutely nothing against Islam or Muslims. If you think Jews do, look back to when Jews and Muslims who lived together in the former Palestine and later after Israel's re-establishment, used to call each other "Achi" (gutteral "ch"), meaning "brother". The Islamists screwed everything up with their fanaticism. I only call you Mohammad because you act like an Islamist and refuse to sign your name. I challenge you to sign your real name.

Total bullshit.

"As I grew up [in Haifa in the 1930s and 1940s]," says Israeli Jay Gonen, "I took Arabs for granted. They were usually called Esma, which is a distortion of the Arab Isma, meaning 'Hear! Hear!' ... In the late forties the term Arabush (plural Arabushim) became more popular. A more demeaning term, it connotes the scorn that the efficient and strong feel toward the weak and inept ... The Jewish conviction [was] that the Arabs understand only the language of force, a bias that persisted for many years and became especially pronounced after the Holocaust." [GONEN, J., p. 180]

We have tons of documentation like this at our web site. You do the work. Look for it and learn something.

1. Sam: Regarding the situation in Israel, you seem to believe that the "Palestinians" are being "oppressed" and "occupied". As I recall from history, before 1967 there were no "Palestinians".

2. Mohammad: "Palestinians" have lived in Israel longer than "Jews." If the acid test of who is who is your own kind of racism, the Arabs of Palestine have a lot more ancestral links to their land than (European-style) Ashkenazi Jews who dominate it today.

NEW RESPONSE BY SAM: If you believe that the original Canaanites are the ancestors of today's Arabs (big stretch), then you could argue that they were on the land first. Even if that's the case, the Jewish conquest of Canaan a couple of thousand years ago was a fair fight, and the Canaanites lost. If winning a war for territory doesn't legitimize your right to be there, then the US, Europe, etc. should re-examine their own rights to their land.

The "fair fight," as documented by your Torah, was a genocide of every Canaanite man, woman and child, with all animals and everything that breathes thrown on the Dead Heap for good measure. Check it out in your Holy Book. The fact that you call the well-known genocide of the Canaanites a manifestation of "fairness" leads to me believe that you are one of the worst of Jewish hypocrites. Shame on you.

You know, at this point I realize there's no use in attempting to feed nutrition to a baby who keeps spitting it away. Why should I continue this with you? You don't want to know anything but your own myths. You live to beat your chest and scream that Jews are the navel of the world.

Most of the documentation to counter your racist, ethnocentric, bigotry is posted at this web site. I haven't got the time to lead every bullheaded propagandist who drops in from cyberspace by the hand to the Truth.

You sent me a followup message, demanding a response. Who do you think you are, Yahweh? You think I'm here at your beckon? Your pompous, arrogant, propagandistic, hyper-defensive Judeocentrism is one of the focuses of this entire web site. Guys like you are a dime a dozen. Less, actually.

You will recognize yourself everywhere on these web site pages that spotlight Jewish Fraud and Hypocrisy.