You wrote in response to a comment of mine that:
Sorry. Your comments are confusing. What are you trying to say? And what is your evidence about Robert Spencer? You're saying he's not Jewish religiously, ethnically, politically, racially, or what? He seems to turn up on the Internet as a "Melkite" Christian. It would be very interesting to learn some details about such a man's social and political past, whether he's Jewish, Arab, or whatever else, how his name came to be Robert Spencer, and why he's such an activist against Islam.

What is confusing about it: In your article you wrote and I quote "Zionist Watch." (Jewish) Critic of Islam Robert Spence has a web site called Jihad Watch and we turn the tables on him ... I'm assuming you are saying here that he is Jewish? Am I wrong? What is my evidence, well like your google search I came up with the same conclusion. Spencer in his talks says he is a Catholic, he was part of several far-right catholic leagues, and is the director of some other group about Christians and Muslims. Clear enough? So you may want to take back your statement that only Jews write things like this. I'm also curious why you didn't address my second point or is that confusing as well? LEt me elaborate:
One of the themes of your wesbite is that Jews control the neo-conservative movement de facto putting power into American foreign policy which hence results in invading Iraq, and Syria and Iran for the future, blah, blah, blah, plaay it again Sam! Regardless of this, my point was that you had talked about a meeting at Georgetown on civil rights on the war on terror, in which around 90% of the lawyers speakign were Jewish. You made a sly comment saying something along the lines of "look at the last names and see how many are Jewish". My question to you is that isn't this a contradiction? If Jews control and highjack American foreign policy for Israel, and all our negative stereotypes about Islam and muslim countries come from Jews wanting to portray them in this light in order to make public opinion favor Israel, then why would so many Jews be against the attack on Muslim civil liberties post 9/11. This doesn't make sense, but then again (I'll let you fill in the blanks). (January 7, 2004)

REPLY: 1) Until further information, we've deleted the "Jewish" descriptor of Robert Spence. But who is he? What is his background? What's his ethnicity? That fact that he is a self-described "Catholic," of itself, means little in a Jewish context. Take the case of French Catholic cardinal Lustiger. Famed Holocaust gurul Elie Wiesel describes Cardinal (and possibly the next pope) Jean Marie-Lustiger's enduring Jewish identity: "He insists that having been born a Jew, he will die a Jew ... [WIESEL, E., 1999, p. 170] ... 'I feel Jewish,' the archbishop responds. 'I refuse to renounce my roots, my Jewishness' ... He goes to make the point that his Jewishness annoys anti-Semites and that this does not displease him. Why should he make them happy by turning his back on the people they execrate?' [WIESEL, E., 1999, p. 171] ... [He] is determined to remain a son of the Jewish people ... He acts accordingly; anyone who requests his assistance in defending a Jewish cause can count on his support ... [WIESEL, E., 1999, p. 171-172]

It is clear that Mr. Spencer is not of Norweigan or African descent. What is his background? Why has he taken up this jihad against Muslims? It is a legitimate question to ask when he is such a visible anti-Islamic activist, appearing all over the place in the mass media.

2) You are err in another spot also. It is not stated at this web site that "only Jews" are anti-Islamic and anti-Arab bigots. They are in the vanguard. They are the leaders in it. But there are non-Jewish sychophants at every level. Zionist activism, media dominance, government-influence, Jewish Hollywood, and all the rest of it emphatically creates the climate for anti-Arab hostility.

3) One of the purposes of this web site is to illustrate an increasing Judeocentric hegemony in the United States. If Jews are in the vanguard of defending "Muslim liberties" post 9-11 (and where is your evidence for that?), Jewish hegemony is total. Insofar as the implication is that Muslims and Arabs are too weak to legally defend themselves in the West, they are at the mercy of the Judeocentric nexus that encompasses them on all fronts. But that's not all. All the principles of "minority rights" benefit Jews, who, politically, collectively function as a pro-Israel cabal in America. You claim that Jews are essentially protecting Muslims and Arabs in the U.S., yet you offer zero evidence for this. I suggest to you that Jewry would be apt to, for instance, fight "ethnic profiling" so vehemently for the simple reason that such a methodology could aim their direction quite easily. Nazi examination of Jewish domination of German culture remains quite fresh in their collective memory. It is crucial to expanding Jewish/Zionist power that inquiries into ethnic power be popularly toxified. In fact, as long "ethnic profiling" in America is decreed to be an illegal and/or immoral taboo, Jewish/Zionist power festers completely unexamined, protected from criticism. And it can only grow, grow, grow.

Is your terrible "blank" now sufficiently filled?