I did expect an objective, analytical response, along with specific answers to the historical data I provided that is easily verifiable; however, all I see is politically inspired revisionism, along with old clichés, without foundation in truth. The responses can easily be directed to the dust bin of fictional history.
For example, the term "Old Testament" is part of Christian replacement theology and for the most part not acceptable in any scholarly discussion, yet it is gratuitously tossed out as a response.
I wrote that leaving was the writer's decision and it was. She clearly states that the reason for her leaving were her fears and nothing else. If her fears are justifiable is another discussion and one that must be recognized and not disguised by rambling hyperbole, without any foundation in truth.
Leave the Khazars and the anti-Semitic rants to history and not prove your inability to answer specifics, as all you accomplish is to prove the writers inability of answering clear and specific charges.
Clarity is a virtue not to be despoiled and to be admired and used whenever possible; this type of response