With the removal, no.

Personally, sure. I'm willing to bet there's a rhetorical game being played with who the "owner" of a ship is, what a "slave ship" is, and what an "ethnic jew" is, which is all pretty standard fare for racist propaganda.

For example, I'm willing to bet that someone would be counted as the "Jewish owner of a slave ship" if they were a protestant whose maternal grandmother was ethnically Jewish, and this person was the co-owner of a merchant company, that listed a trading ship in it's assets, that would occasionally carry slaves from Africa along with other commodities like gold and ivory. All while this person identified themselves as Spanish or Portuguese, and the company itself was a Spanish or Portuguese company.

Despite the fact that Portuguese and Spanish people really were hugely influential in the slave trade as part of the Portuguese and Spanish Empire's strategic operations, none of them will be ethnically or racially blamed for slavery, showing the hypocrisy of the whole thing.

Even then, there's no reason that the Portuguese or the Spanish should be claimed to be guilty of some sort of crime, because it's abhorrent to try and claim that any ethnicity should be labeled universally guilty of something.

Not to mention that the top quote is that 78% of all Slave owners period were Jews, which doesn't even make sense considering how many slave owners in the US were Anglo or Germanic, how many were Catholic Spanish & Portugese in Latin America, how many were Arab or Turkish Muslim in Northern Africa & Europe, and how many were African in Africa.