So, the upshot of this discussion is that you are perfectly willing to throw out sweeping generalizations, and unwilling to actually, you know, cite facts when calling people names. You said:

Ever heard of libel? I don't always agree with CAIR, but people like Spencer frequently cross the line between legitimate political debate and outrageously unsubstantiated charges in the way they treat CAIR (and, by implication, all Muslims who exercise their right to disagree with US policy on the Middle East) as terrorism supporters. Were this same standard applied to the Jewish community, many Jews would be spending much of their time endlessly explaining why they arent' necessarily Kahanists because they disagree with Israel's critics (not all of whom are wackos or anti-Semites).

I asked for cites. Now you say:

I'm sharing my view of his arguments and am not inclined to writing a legal brief at the moment. You're certainly welcome to your opinion.

Sorry, but that doesn't cut it. You're sharing your accusations that Spencer commits libel, and yet, you have come up with absolutely zero examples of such.

I've got a new motto for debating on comments threads: Cite it or bite it. I like it. Short. Pithy. To the point.

If you cannot substantiate a fact-based argument, well... figure it out.

Dan, snark is definitely in the eye of the beholder. However, I'm a little confused at they way you acknowledge that Mein Kampf and the Protocols have proliferated in the Arab world, and yet accuse me of making a generalization about, well, their proliferation in the Arab world. It isn't a generalization if it's true.

It's a best-seller in: Turkey. The territories. Great Britain (Arabic translation). Jordan.

You can find it pretty much throughout the Arab and Muslim world. You're agreeing with me on that, and yet, you say I am making assumptions.

Uh, no. I don't make assumptions. I make statements based on facts. If you're accusing me of exaggerating, then yes, guilty as charged. There may only be three or four hundred versions of Mein Kampf instead of the full 500. (Yes, that was another generalization. Sue me.)

On the other hand, if you think anti-Semitic portrayals of Jews began and ended with the Third Reich, you have a lot of learning to do. Anti-Semitism was pervasive long before Mein Kampf was formed in the fever swamp of Hitler's mind. Start by looking up pogroms and move on from there.

Personally, I recommend the Jewish Virtual Library over Wikipedia. Wikipedia is a flawed source, but a good place to start and find other links.

I'm sure you're all familiar with Godwin's Law:

As an online discussion grows longer, the probability of a comparison involving Nazis or Hitler approaches one.

I have added a corollary to it, which is essentially that any comment thread that mentions Jews, Israel, religion, or bigotry, will always devolve into anti-Semitism.

I'm actually pretty amazed that all your comment threads don't have the Jew-hating trolls on it. But they'll come. It's a sign of popularity and their peculiar obsession with Jews.

I swear, there are some David Duke followers that sit around and vanity-Google their leader's name, because Every. Single. Time. I mention him on my weblog, they come out of the woodwork.

That comment up there, Michael? Kid stuff. I could field it with my eyes closed. It's not even the norm from the tiny-dick variety (a.k.a. neo-Nazis).

I didn't post the video to make fun of you, Jacob. I laughed when I first saw it, but it's because you were obviously having so much fun. It's infectious.

I probably should have worded the post more specifically, too. Note to self: People can't read what's in your head while writing posts.