The Guardian’s Anti-Semitic Explanation For Shalit Deal
October 24, 2011 14:49 by Simon Plosker
Over the years, we’ve covered some vicious and despicable pieces in the media, many of them published in The Guardian. But amongst the many commentaries and analyses of the Gilad Shalit prisoner deal, one by Deborah Orr in The Guardian’s print edition really plumbs the depths.
Orr writes:
All this, I fear, is simply an indication of how inured the world has become to the obscene idea that Israeli lives are more important than Palestinian lives. Netanyahu argues that he acted because he values Shalit’s life so greatly.
Yet who is surprised really, to learn that Netanyahu sees one Israeli’s freedom as a fair exchange for the freedom of so many Palestinians? Likewise, Hamas wished to use their human bargaining chip to gain release for as many Palestinians as they could. They don’t have much to bargain with.
Is Orr really suggesting that Israel’s desire to get back one of its soldiers at such a high price is driven by some racist sense of valuing Israeli or Jewish life above all others? Apparently so:
At the same time, however, there is something abject in their eagerness to accept a transfer that tacitly acknowledges what so many Zionists believe – that the lives of the chosen are of hugely greater consequence than those of their unfortunate neighbours.
The abuse of the concept of the “chosen people” refers specifically to Jews and is commonly employed by anti-Semites to falsely assert that Jews claim to be superior to non-Jews not only in a theological sense but also in a racial one.
As Joseph Telushkin asks:
Does Judaism believe that chosenness endows Jews with special rights in the way racist ideologies endow those born into the “right race”? Not at all. The most famous verse in the Bible on the subject of chosenness says the precise opposite: “You alone have I singled out of all the families of the earth. That is why I call you to account for all your iniquities” (Amos 3:2). Chosenness is so unconnected to any notion of race that Jews believe that the Messiah himself will descend from Ruth, a non-Jewish woman who converted to Judaism.
The fact that Israel values the life of a solitary individual so much that it is prepared to release hundreds of Palestinians responsible for some of the most appalling terrorist outrages instead tells us how much Israel values human life. This overwhelming desire to return one of its own people is a value to be proud of.
Deborah Orr
Orr appears to be distressed at the implication of a deal that sees one Jew as the equivalent of 1000 Arabs. If this is the case, then Orr would be better directing her ire at Hamas for demanding and setting such an unbalanced equivalance.
That Deborah Orr is prepared to descend to the depths of anti-Semitism to claim that Israel is motivated by racism says much about her own warped values. That The Guardian was prepared to publish such an obscene commentary merely confirms the publication’s vicious anti-Israel bent.
Send your considered comments to The Guardian -letters@guardian.co.uk
UPDATE
Jonathan Freedland
Writing in a Guardian commentary in the October 26 print edition, it is clear at whom Jonathan Freedland is aiming this paragraph:
It should go without saying that Israelis would have preferred a one-to-one exchange, releasing a single Palestinian prisoner, rather than more than a thousand – many of them guilty of horrendous acts of violence – in return for Shalit. But, contrary to what some have suggested, it was Hamas, not Israel, that set that 1:1000 exchange rate; it was Hamas, not Israel, who decided that the freedom of a single Israeli was worth the freedom of a thousand Palestinians.
Still no sign, however, of The Guardian publishing any proper rebuttals of Deborah Orr, either in its opinion section or on the letters page.
UPDATE 2 – DEBORAH ORR RESPONDS
The intense criticism and the deluge of emails from HonestReporting subscribers and other concerned parties to The Guardian has had some effect. The October 27 print edition contains a response from none other than Deborah Orr herself.
See our Special Update – Deborah Orr’s Disgusting Excuse For an Apology
Okey
12:17 am
Oct 25, 2011
Mammals like Deborah Orr discard rationality, logic, compassion and other human virtues when they engage with Jewish issues. They have behaved like this for centuries.
Those who employ them in institutions like The Guardian and the BBC identify with their world view, which allocates to the Jews a “special” place, namely, powerless dhimmis.
It is the likes of Deborah Orr and her leftist/jihadist confederates,together with some Christian elements, who have chosen the Jews for this special status.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
30 
0
Nathan Zafran
12:33 am
Oct 25, 2011
By now I should be more than tired and bored with British perfidy, treachery, bias and hypocrisy, but apparently, I’m always surprised anew by the vile and evil attitude of the Brits to Israel and the Jews. (Remember, the Brits have a morbid and disgusting, if not appalling record in it’s antisemitic history). This is just another case of the anti-Israeli rats falling over each other to be a better antisemitic hatemonger. The Brits deserve more, much more, of the troubles they’re facing with their Islamic invaders, in spite of all the anti-Israeli appeasement and boot licking (I almost used a different expression but decorum, you know! I refrained). F… the Brits!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
23 
3
Randolph de Hyde
1:08 am
Oct 25, 2011
Sir
I for one must express my total agreement with the fundamental point expressed in the article writteny Ms Orr following the prisoner exchange between Israel and Hamas. She is absolutely right in her argument that all human life is equal. Whether you subscribe to the school of creation or evolution, this point is clearly one which must be remembered in order that we, as human beings, remain “human”.
However, I feel that her point of view that the ratio weighted 1000/1 in favour of the Palestinians is an indication that Israel is displaying a supreme arrogance in valuing one Israeli life as 1000 times more valuable than a Palestinian life is both ignorant and inaccurate.
The first point to remember is that were this a fair swap, Mr. Shalit should have crossed the border to freedom as 1 Palestinian croosed in the other direction towards his own freedom. I have no doubt that Israel would have been only too delighted to agree such a deal, which would, as Ms Orr points out, represent a deal where all human lives are valued as equal.
However, the fact that Hamas would only release Mr. Shalit in exchange for 1000 Palestinian prisoners is surely a measure of how lowly Hamas value the lives of their own people, as it is clearly they who came up with the suggested ratio. At the same time, the only point demonstrated by Israel’s participation in this transaction is quite how highly they value life.
The most obvious trait which binds all life on Earth is the will of the strong to protect their young and their women. This is why men have for all of time stepped into the path of danger to protect their children and their wives. It is what makes us Humans, and in reality, what makes animals human.
The common behaviour however seems to stop at the border, where we enter the realm of Hamas and their brave freedom fighters. We should all watch in admiration at the brave and protective way their fighters take positions behind the skirts of their women and the cribs of their children, as they take aim at Israeli cities, safe in the knowledge that it is the high value which Israelis and all other normal people place on life which procludes them from wiping out these cowards.
Until a moratorium is called on being human, and Israel is both allowed to defend itself with all means at its disposal from people who have no interest in a negotiated settlement, the world will remain a more dangerous place.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
61 
0
Rafi
1:45 am
Oct 25, 2011
This woman is a shameful disgrace to her Hebrew name.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
27 
1
Joe Ezekiel
2:10 am
Oct 25, 2011
Perhaps the likes of Deborah Orr in the Arab world – and there are countless numbers of them – particularly those in the United Nations should sponser a new resolution to condemn Israel for the more than 1,000 to 1 swap of terrorists against a hostage. After all is that (condemning Israel) not the favourite and principal preoccupation of the United Nations?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
22 
0
Abie Werth
5:04 am
Oct 25, 2011
Dear Miss Orr,
I am a Jew and very happy and proud of that fact. I have never ever considered being anything else. I do not consider myself as being better than you, just more fortunate.
A child has no control on the selection of it’s parents. I feel I was lucky to be born a Jew. I was taught to be honest, truthful and all the attributes of my boy scout oath. They also taught me to try to understand other faiths as the right of those to practice it.
Why is it you feel that Jews are bad? Is it because you are secretly envious. You too can become a Jew. We do accept converts. You must first learn to be honest a trait you do not now possess. Try comfortiung yourself by becoming an understanding human being. You might also try writing your news articles with honesty; not as a person of great intellect. You fail there also.
Abie Werth
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
12 
0
Dr Michael Bergman
5:30 am
Oct 25, 2011
I wondered how long it would take a ‘newspaper’ like the ‘Guardian’ to turn logic, ethics and humanity on its head and produce an antisemitic ‘gem’. I congratulate Orr for writing such a piece, which is a quite clever example of inverted convoluted logic posing as ‘reason’. As we all know, antisemitism is alive and well in the Western World and in publications like the ‘Guardian’.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
17 
0
Arie Markel
8:04 am
Oct 25, 2011
I am astonished to see in a modern and well known newspaper an article that lacks any logic and reasonable sequence and is entirely devoted to hatred and hostility toward Israel and the Jewish people. By reading Deborah Orr paper one gets the impression that Israelis are a band of butchers and killers and the Palestinians belonging to Hammas a group of beautiful souls or blessed nuns that can enjoy the sanctity of life only if Israelis do not exist.
I can not see the logic in perceiving the exchange of an Israel soldier for 1000 palestinians (many of them responsible for killing hundreds of children and innocent people in their way to school or back home) as a demonstration that Israelis consider their lives superior to that of palestinians. Rather, this is a demonstration of how much Jewish people values holiness of life.
The article of Debora Orr is full of hate towards Israel. The way the word “Zionist” is used by Deborah reminds us of the use of “Jew” by other ‘honorable people’. She uses the word ‘obscene’ as in other articles she wrote about the Israeli/Palestinian conflict, to describe Israel. I believe it is an obscene to use the terminology she uses to describe the Israeli nation.
Freeing Shalit took more than 5 years. Israel was ready to make the exchange for 1 palestinian prisoner. Hammas was not ready for this at all. Israel was ready to make the exchange for 10 palestinian prisoner. Hammas was not ready for this at all. Israel was ready to make the exchange for 100 palestinian prisoner. Hammas was not ready for this at all. Only after Israel was ready to free more than 1000 thousand Palestinian prisoners was Hammas ready to make the exchange. I wonder who values life more and who thinks that 1000 thousand Palestinians are equal to one lonely Israeli prisoner. Are you able, Deborah to think in this way? Or this is impossible for you?
Arie Markel,
Haifa, Israel
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
18 
0
john norman
9:02 am
Oct 25, 2011
Deborah Orr is of the opinion that Gaza is the largest open-air prison in the world. Maybe. But, then, she hasn’t taken a look at North Korea recently, or ever.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
11 
0
matt
10:10 am
Oct 25, 2011
This “journalist” has obviously written this piece of dreck at the behest of anti-Semitic superiors….the concept of an unbiased approach to the truth is too hard for so many of them. Cowards.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
12 
0
sav'ta shel Cohen
10:18 am
Oct 25, 2011
Ms Orr v Rest Of World Media (ROWM). ROWM sniggered and gained smug satisfaction at what appeared to them to be a well deserved shafting of Israel and the Jewish people because the safe return of one young man cost them 1,027 murdering, blood thirsty terrorists. Ms Orr, displaying, what must be the most magnificent example of iconic thought in human history being so completely devoid of intellectual rigor or conceptual analysis has worked out that Jews actually go out of their way to shaft themselves and will turn every disaster, misfortune, encounter with murdering terrorists and other wholesome experiences of the human condition into acts of self-shafting because (and here is the all important, Nobel prize winning contribution to placozoanic thought) shafting one’s self makes one look superior! Oh no, I think my IQ just fell into the negative integers just through coming in contact with her work! Ms Orr – you have convinced me that DNA and intellect are just so overrated – all hail, queen of the placozoans!
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
10 
0
Matthew
10:30 am
Oct 25, 2011
Yes, because obviously Israel wanted to release 1000 palestinians just to prove their racist and inequitable views… Actually, in my opinion, the deal was rather good. Gilad Shalit is worth far more than a thousand terrorists.
Wait… am I being racist? No. I would uphold the life of an American Soldier above a thousand terrorists, or even ten thousand terrorists, or more. Though, in my mind that would mean shooting the ten thousand terrorists to ensure the safety of the American Soldier, or the Israeli, or any other Soldier or Civilian whose life was under threat by the forces of terror in the world.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
12 
0
Johay
10:45 am
Oct 25, 2011
1 Israeli=1025 Palestinians (Hamas definition!)
1 Israeli= 30 Egyptians (Last swipe)
Question : How many Palestinians worth 1 Egyptian ?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
11 
0
Jonathan
2:25 pm
Oct 25, 2011
0.02926829268292682926829268292683
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
Michael H
1:30 pm
Oct 25, 2011
Just a little cherry on the Debora Orr cake
http://web.archive.org/web/20060219042523/http://www.regrettheerror.com/2005/10/bbc_host_apolog.html
She basically used the F word on live TV.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Dan
4:20 pm
Oct 25, 2011
To the Editors of The Guardian
By now, I would hope, you’ve read the public responses to this article.
The effects of the Guardian echo chamber have reached new heights. In this article, it’s clear how much blinding hatred must permeate your organization, not only for Deborah Orr to write such a despicable piece, but for the Guardian to allow it’s publication. And I can only imagine the Guardian’s response to my letter and letters like mine — dismissive, superior, or perhaps “Must be from a Jew”. If I’m wrong, please tell me. But the Guardian hasn’t in the past done any soul searching as a result of publishing similarly toned articles, so I doubt this occasion would be any different.
Yet, you should be ashamed. Please, please use this as an opportunity to reset your moral compass, challenge the assumptions under which you operate, and make an attempt to return to a semblance of objectivity. That’s what a newspaper SHOULD be about.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
7 
0
Dave
7:14 pm
Oct 25, 2011
This is typical of The Guardian: Israel shows compassion and respect for humanity, and they turn it around to make Israel look racist. I realize this type of antisemitism is in vogue for many on the far Left nowadays, with Israel powerful and the big, bad U.S.A. on its side (sort of). They see it as their duty to stand up for the downtrodden, no matter how they treat themselves or their neighbors. However, their refusal to treat Israel with the same respect with which they treat her enemies shows obvious racism.
As for Ms. Orr, she’s responsible for what she writes, but she’s trying to keep her job too. The problem lies not with her, but with her short-sighted employers preaching a ridiculous double standard for political ends.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
Tracey
7:32 pm
Oct 25, 2011
I am curious what Ms Orr thinks Israel should have done when Hamas offered to release Shalit in exchange for 1000 Palestinians. Should Israel have said, “No! His life is worth no more than a Palestinian’s! We will release him only in exchange for exactly 1 Palestinian prisoner!”
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
53 
0
Rafi
8:46 pm
Oct 25, 2011
Hamas put the high price-tag on Shalit. It was they who decided the value of one Jew is 1,100 murderers. Orr writes of Israel’s “unfortunate neighbors” without explaining that she is referring to their failure, after launching half a dozen unprovoked wars of annihilation on Israel, to achieve their goal. Her bare-faced lie that Israel was “eager” to pay this price can fool only the retarded among her readership. It would not have taken an “eager” Israel five long years to concede to the unjust release of so many convicted criminals – now emboldened by their Gaurdian angel in the UK.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
43 
0
Michael
9:31 pm
Oct 25, 2011
Ms. Orr libelously writes “what so many Zionist believe – the lives of one of the chosen are of hugely greater consequence than those of their unfortunate neighbors”. She of course refers to Jews when she uses the UK press code “Zionists”. For “chosen-ness” with its attendant and well-documented responsibilities, is a Jewish obligation to live in an exemplary manner and promote values by the behavior of its adherents – not by the sword, nor by missionaries.
Zionism (and Orr claims to know the thoughts of many Zionists) is the political expression of the historic Jewish title to the land of Israel – also well documented, and prior to any British land title, and no less valid.
Orr follows a long line of brazenly malicious anti-Semites in accusing Jews of racist supremacy, as if the Jews and not British ruled half the planet and called other entire nations “subjects” and called their lands “Empire”.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
47 
0
Gloria Levene
10:18 pm
Oct 25, 2011
It is quite unbelievable that the humanity and sacrifice shown by Israel for one young soldier aged only 19 when kidnapped should be twisted into this anti-Zionist rant .. Hammas set the ransom. The parents of palastinian suicide bombers have such pride to see their children “martyred”
Obviously Israel values the life of one child and will do everything to save him.
If it was her child what would she say then.. It is staggering that she has the audacity to even write such nonsence.
If the Palastinians put down their weapons there would be no more killings and conflict… if Israel puts down their weapons.. there will be no more Israel. If a people threaten to wipe England off the face of the earth, what would England do ? The article was a disgrace
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
36 
0