All very clear Pierre, but until you give source details for others to check, the sources you say exist do not.
Its really very simple, you do not take another persons work as being gospel.
Its the sources which as you rightly say will prove the case.
So we need the sources do we not!!
I am analyzing the sources constantly and I would like to come to a point in this were I can sit down and write the book to give you the whole history with all the sources. I am fighting with my academic conscience all the time. Is it the right point in time now to do this or not. Do I have all the material. Is there still data I must look into. And so on and so forth. And I know that there is still a little work to be done.
You have critiqued a document and interpreted it the way you think it reads. You have not provided the source for anyone else to do the same. Are we supposed lay down and agree with you on those terms? The historical sources all say the word on the wall was in some form or fashion 'Jews'. Not judges. Where do you draw the line for what historical sources are correct and incorrect? Only when it fits into your theory? You have done nothing to change the status quo.
He might have decided not to give the source he interprets after what happened with gogmagog, he gave his interpretation, and the source, and got destroyed, by just giving his interpretation when he is destroyed he can claim "but mine was a different source".
G U T
There are two ways to be fooled, one is to believe what isn't true, the other is to refuse to believe that which is true.