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
Guardian Reader’s Editor’s half-hearted apology for antisemitic reporting | Anne's Opinions
1:34 am
Nov 08, 2011
[...] drew huge criticism and thousands of complaints from the whole spectrum of political opinion; see Honest Reporting, CifWatch, Normblog, Harry’s Place (twice), amongst many others. These critiques brought [...]
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
jacob
7:39 pm
Nov 08, 2011
The Guardian Judeophobes must be grateful they heap garbage on Israel and Jews…as
skunks know damned well who do tehy spray on ….
Would they be doing it to Muslims, they would have run the same fate as that French
satirical publication CHARLIE HEBDO…
But the artricle of that despicable ORR woman and her “apology” reminds me of that
one that called “RACISTS” the Israeli soldiers for not even attempting to rape Arab
women at the CAST LEAD operation….
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
9 
2
Mr. Light-Bright
4:22 am
Nov 09, 2011
Really… I really wish people would look at the dark-side of themselves, and think: hmm maybe it is possible to be prejudice at times given certain emotions arise. ?Nope? we are all perfect right? perfect perfect perfect, and never dare be associated with: greed, malice, vanity, swindling etc…
“Perfect” my ass!
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Sylvie Schapira
12:26 pm
Dec 02, 2012
Yes, and your point is?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
The Guardian Acknowledges Anti-Semitism…Or Does It? | The Conservative Papers
8:44 am
Nov 09, 2011
[...] Orr’s “chosen” slur in a particularly nasty Guardian opinion piece on the Gilad Shalit prisoner exchange and her [...]
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
Dave Isaacs
9:49 am
Nov 09, 2011
Orr’s use of the word “Zionist” instead of “Jewish” in her article is a typical ploy used by anti-semites. The bible talks about Jews as the chosen people. Orr’s use implies that she has nothing against Jews only the Zionists amongst them.
And why not use the word “Israelis”? She has quite deliberately used the word as a racial slur, not just against Zionists but all those that side with the Jewish state.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
10 
3
Tommy
12:52 am
Dec 02, 2012
We would have sell it if we could. But nobody wnaetd a bare hull, with delaminated deck, no gears and broken mast. We even try to give it away with no success, all the gears are going into the new boat. We also wnaetd the lead as it was suppose to be, but it end up being Cast Iron.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
CLEMENT LEVY
6:13 pm
Nov 23, 2011
NEXT TO THE BBC THE GUARDIAN IS THE RACIST AND ANTI-SEMITIC NAZIS ARA PUBLICATION
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
10 
2
Martyman39
9:08 pm
Sep 03, 2012
They would have given Der Sturmer a good run for their money in Hitler’s days.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
The Guardian: The ugliest newspaper in Britain « Iran Aware
3:52 pm
Aug 02, 2012
[...] The Guardian’s anti-Semitic explanation for the Shalit deal http://honestreporting.com/the-guardians-anti-semitic-explanation-for-shalit-… [...]
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
Hitler’s newspaper …… had he lived | FavStocks
9:28 am
Aug 03, 2012
[...] The Guardian's anti-Semitic explanation for the Shalit dealhttp://honestreporting.com/the-guardians-anti-semitic-explanation-for-shalit-… [...]
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Tired of Seeing Israel Slammed in the Media? | Blogs about Israel aggregation
12:43 pm
Aug 07, 2012
[...] media bias alerts such as our recent campaign against The Guardian’s anti-Semitic response to the Gilad Shalit swap. The Guardian [...]
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Okey
10:00 pm
Sep 03, 2012
Deborah Orr is a product of Western “civilisation”, which is so suffused with Christian anti-Judaism that even in the post-Christian era its members continue to nurture this hatred and contempt. It has become a “cultural” as well as a religious phenomenon.
In the West if you want to insult some one, you call him a Jew. One witnesses this even among those who’ve never even seen a Jew in their lives.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
5 
0
Sylvie Schapira
10:40 am
Sep 04, 2012
On the ‘choseness’ issue: History shows that Whites (Christians) and Europeans (colonialists) believed themselves ‘chosen’ and superior. Now Islam sees itself as superior to the rest of us. For Jews, it never implied superiority, but chosen for a task – to bring God’s messages to a pagan and uncivilized world. (A light unto the nations). There is an irony here. The messenger is the one who is getting shot.
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
vivarto
8:41 pm
Sep 04, 2012
Sylvie,
you said
“For Jews, it never implied superiority, but chosen for a task – to bring God’s messages to a pagan and uncivilized world. “
To “be chosen by God for a task” is superiority.
To bring “God’s message to a pagan and uncivilized world” is extreme superiority.
It implies that pagan is “lower”, and our religion is “higher”. That we are civilized, and they are not civilized.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
4
Gary Katz
8:56 pm
Sep 04, 2012
If one didn’t find your religion superior to others, you probably wouldn’t remain in that religion. That doesn’t stop you from respecting people of other religions. You can also respect other religions, even though they may not be your cup of tea. To me, the big pain in the neck is when members of a different religion try to convert me or make me obey their rules, like Muslims in certain countries punishing non-Muslims for eating in public during the fasting periods of Ramadan. Could you imagine a single Jew proposing that non-Jews should be prohibited from eating in public on Yom Kippur?
Well-loved. Agree or Disagree:
4 
0
vivarto
9:23 pm
Sep 04, 2012
“Could you imagine a single Jew proposing that non-Jews should be prohibited from eating in public on Yom Kippur?”
This is the basic difference between Judaism, and Hinduism on one hand, and Christianity and Islam on the other.
Judaism and Hinduism are national religions of the respective nations.
Christianity and Islam are universalist religions that believe that they are the only way to salvation, and everyone MUST adopt them.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
2
Dale Schaan
10:55 pm
Sep 04, 2012
Vivarto- please don’t compare us to Muslims. Their prophet taught and led by example to spread Islam by force. Jesus and the Apostles taught us to spread our religion by reason,discussion,debate,kindness,etc. All the while showing even our enemies love! Yes many who called themselves Christians forced their beliefs on others and did gr8 violence to those who disagreed. These were the hypocrites and wolves in sheep’s clothing that Jesus and the Apostles said to be on guard 4 within the church. It is not an exclusive faith but open to all who freely choose it.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
2
vivarto
11:06 pm
Sep 04, 2012
I was only comparing Christianity to Islam in one sense of being universalist. Both try to spread their message to the whole humanity. Both believe that only through their religion there is salvation and that outside of it there is eternal damnation.
I agree with you that Jesus far superior to Muhammad, (but then who wasn’t?)
Indeed according to the Gospels he did not murder anyone, nor rape, torture, knowingly deceive and lie, nor did he abuse any child.
Christianity, just like Islam used to be a imperial enterprise, today, most of Christianity is a personal faith, and as long as Christians are not trying to impose their values on others I am perfectly happy with them.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Rafi
2:40 am
Sep 05, 2012
Colonizing forty percent of planet earth, calling it Fhe British Empire, annd calling the inhabitants of conquered, stolen lands “subjects” of their conquerors – would all seem to imply some attitude of superiority wouldn’t you say, Deborah?
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
vivarto
2:54 am
Sep 05, 2012
Rafi,
Of course Brits thought of themselves as superior.
Every normal nation does. Germans, Russians, Indians, Japanese, Persians, Muslims and Arabs, even people in tiny countries like Denmark or Island, think of themselves as superior.
It is normal to think of your own nation as superior, special, most beautiful, greatest, and all that.
Therefore a Jew who does not think of his own nation as superior is a multiculturalist freak.
It is like a lover that think that his beloved is the most beautiful woman in the world. Is she objectively so? Who cares! Love is subjective. A Jew who does not love his people is a jerk.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Sylvie Schapira
12:41 pm
Dec 02, 2012
Thank you for your interpretation don’t think you would do very well in a Yeshiva. Since pagan’s were into sacrificing and eating their own children, Judaism declared this to be wrong – thus offering the world the 10 Commandments and ways of moral living. This is not about inferiority vs superior. In effect, your use of language tells me more about you than you realize. Just as Islam believes in ‘superiority’ as a religion, and infidels (Jews, Christians and others) as ‘inferior’, perhaps you are a closeted Muslim? Or an appeaser? Which is it? Jews on the other hand never think of choseness as being superior. It is antisemites who have thrown that at us.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
vivarto
8:53 pm
Sep 04, 2012
part 2
We can pretend all we want that “this does not mean superiority, that we were just like everyone else and God just happened to chose us. That it could as well have been the Irish.”
Nobody will buy it, not even us.
Even if it was true that God closed his eyes, put his hand in the hat and pulled a the ticked with “Jews” written on it, to the chagrin of the Irish, this would still make us special, just like someone who wins a lottery.
If we, unlike all other people, did not think that we are were better, that really would make us better. However we do think that we are better and just like the rest of the politically correct Westerner, we are dishonest about it.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
Sylvie Schapira
12:47 pm
Dec 02, 2012
Vivarto: ‘you can pretend all you like’. Can you please stop speaking for the whole of the Jewish people. You do not speak for me. Just speak for yourself – you may feel superior or believe you are – that’s your problem, but it is not a Judaic belief. So just shut up about it!
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Vivarto
1:00 pm
Dec 02, 2012
I see: “just shut up”, what a great way to have a conversation.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
vivarto
7:34 pm
Sep 04, 2012
Political correctness is garbage.
Normal people love their own family, their own tribe and their nation, and care for them before the others.
Normal Arabs would in an instant sacrifice 1 million Jews for one innocent Arab.
Normal Jews (if we could find one somewhere), should likewise gladly sacrifice 1 million Arabs for a single Jew.
The difference is that Arabs would be delighted to kill 1 million Jews even without saving one innocent Arab. Normal Jews on the other hand, would not want to kill Arabs without a good reason.
Having said that, I 100% affirm that from a normal Jew’s perspective, a freedom of one Jew is easily worth 1000 Arabs. Nothing racist about it.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
2
emes
3:17 pm
Sep 05, 2012
Vivarto, there are no normal arabs! They are volatile, hating anything that smacks of western ideals, Jewish vision, intellect and production – where you get your concepts of how Jews live, and their history is laughable. You are on the same, sinking ship as the Guardian and its correspondent Deborah Orr (by the way, she didn’t need to abbreviate her surname, she only has to comment to show what she is!)
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Vivarto
4:59 pm
Sep 05, 2012
Of course many Arabs are perverts. That’s byproduct of Islam.
> You are on the same, sinking ship as the Guardian and its correspondent Deborah Orr
Oh no sir!
I am the opposite of these antisemites who would like to see Jews to be “morally superior” and let Arabs murder them all.
I would support killing 1000 Arabs if that would save one innocent Jew. Certainly not Deborah’s sentiment. (Incidentally, Arabs feel the same way about their people, which I consider normal).
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
emes
5:16 pm
Sep 05, 2012
For crying out loud Vivarto, you seem to run with the hares and hunt with the hounds, make your mind up which party you are espousing about – All I know is that this whole world is becoming covered by a near total eclipse of islamaphobia and you will be covered in the same excrement of hatred and envy to, what the muslims consider, “infidels.” – It seems you are so far up your own backside you can count the fillings in your wisdom teeth – sort your life out!
Agree or Disagree:
1 
1
Vivarto
7:20 pm
Sep 05, 2012
>It seems you are so far up your own backside you can count the fillings in your wisdom teeth – sort your life out!
Well, you seem to have run out of thins to say, and could not resist the urge to make an uncalled for personal attack. Shame on you.
>you seem to run with the hares and hunt with the hounds, make your mind up which party you are espousing about
Sadly your statement here shows that you were not able to understand the meaning of what I was saying.
I don’t need to make up my mind, my eye are open and I see the Islamic threat. The Islamic colonisation of Europe, and Islamic “cultural” imperialism colonizing the minds of the “progressives”.
I am the strongest supporter of Israel.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
1
Vivarto
1:10 pm
Dec 02, 2012
You are spouting meaningless personal attacks.
But I can understand your problem.
you are feeling a bit upset because my point is a little above your mental abilities.
You cannot get it, so you assume it is illogical.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Rafi
2:29 am
Sep 05, 2012
Vitaro, you have a point.
On the other hand, Dale shaan who responds to you here is quite wrong. For instance the Spanish Inquisition was official poicy of the Toman Catholic Church for three hundred and twenty years. The horrendous atrocities carried out in Europe and in rhe newly discovered North America and the Carribean were Christian acts carried out by wolves in wolves clothing.
It was teo millenia of OFFICIAL Christian dogma that facilitated the murder of millions by Christians in WW2.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
0
vivarto
2:50 am
Sep 05, 2012
Rafi,
Dale is right as for the essence of Christianity, which can be defined as following Jesus’ example.
Christians committed horrible crimes including genocides of various peoples first in Europe then in Americas and various colonies. Also near genocide of the Jewish people. However you could not reasonably claim that they were following the example of Jesus. Quite on the contrary, they behaved more like followers of Muhammad.
This difference is significant because it allowed for correction of Christianity from the inside. On the other hand, you’d never want the Muhammadans go to their roots and start practicing their religion like Muhammad thought them…
Agree or Disagree:
1 
1
Rafi
3:17 am
Sep 05, 2012
People are defined by what they do, not whether they follow the teachings of this or that person.
The official institutions of the Christia Church have in fact preached anti-Semitism since there beginnig. Their members are called Christians, and many have flowed tge teachings of their church.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
vivarto
6:12 am
Sep 05, 2012
Rafi,
The Christian church is the source of the genocidal antisemitism that.
However the fact that Jesus, unlike Muhammad, was not a sadistic bastard, allows for change within the Christian church.
It would be unfair and unwise of us not to acknowledge that many Christian churches today have positive attitudes towards Israel. They are our strongest allies in America. Far more supportive than the American Jews, many of whom consider homosexual marriage more important that Israel.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
1
Dan
1:40 am
Sep 07, 2012
The “Jews” you refer to are not following the teachings of Moses. They like that you call them “Jews” because it gives them a sense that their opinions on matters Jewish carry equal weight with those of genuine Jews. Also some elements in the media, for instance the BBC, love them because the broadcasters can then claim support for their anti-Israel and anti-Jewish venom from actual Jews.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Rafi
3:06 am
Sep 05, 2012
Did the emperor Constantine feel somewhat superior when he forced all of Europe to become Christian at the point of a sword?
The twenty- seven Christian countries of Europe are unanimous in almost nothing – save one thing: denying Jerusalem as Israel’s capital. This is a prioroty for Christian Europe all of whose legal systems and common law are traced back to Jerusalem and the laws of the Jews.
No century has been without wars and bloodshed in Christian Europe.
It’s time more attention was paid to other Jewish imperatives like: Thou shalt not kill; Thou shalt ot steal (even for Empire building);Thou shalt not bear false witness(deborah Orr); Thou shalt not covet thy neighbor’s property (nor his Capital city) – Start with that. Then you can consider ending you criticizm of an ancient peace-loving nation who have only benefited mankind in countless ways. You can end your hostility, fraudulently based on presumed negative attributes of a nation that believes in responsibility.
Journalists in prominent, widely read newspapers also assume responsibility.
It is time for Deborah Orr to begin to discharge that responsibility.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
vivarto
5:56 am
Sep 05, 2012
Rafi,
“Peace loving” is a terrible word.
Everyone claims to be peace loving, but this is propaganda for the countries own population.
Jews are the only idiots on the block who take this seriously and open themselves to all sort of abuses.
Historically there was nothing peace-loving about the Jews. Our ancestors fought all the time in the Land of Israel.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
2
Dan
12:05 am
Sep 06, 2012
When you say “..open themselves to all sorts of abuse..” you should be explicit fro the uneducated, and clarify that those nations with Jews in their midst have always had a percentage who would grasp at the slightest pretext to do the “abusing”.
And, no – the expression “peace-loving” is not “terrible” as you say. It defines how Jews have lived, even amongst the most vicious nations on the planet, whose abuses are due to their lack of morals, and not to the Jews’ simple wish for peace. No inquisitions.
Yes, even when the “idiots on the block” leave the neighborhood and build their own block, the abuse, and the idiots who espouse it physically and intellectually, still pursue us.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Vivarto
2:25 am
Sep 07, 2012
The “Jews” [ ] not following the teachings of Moses.
That’s me Dan
They like that you call them “Jews”
No, Dan! Don’t give a hoot what you call me. I just happened to be Jewish and you calling me or not calling me would not change it.
>because it gives them a sense that their opinions on matters Jewish carry equal weight with those of genuine Jews.
You narrow minded fascist: How dare you to call me “not genuine Jew”!
My grandparents were murdered for being Jews, and I have been persecuted for being Jew. I don’t deny my origins and my people, not even a sorry case like you.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Dan
4:20 am
Sep 07, 2012
Relax, chill, and don’t be abusive. I am mot a racist. To clarify: i was referring specifically to you description of some “…American Jews, many of whom consider homosexual marriage more important that Israel”. Judaism forbids the practice you refer to. Judaism mandates worship in Jerusalem and settling the land of Israel. Judaism is a system and body of law. To try to separate Jewish law from “being jewish” is meaningless.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Dan
4:02 am
Sep 09, 2012
Judaism precludes atheism. It demands constant daily affirmation of the ultimate sovereignt of theCreator. Your description of your own belief and the adjectives you have used to describe the God worshiped by genuine Jews, define you as outside of that community. Maybe your future choices will change.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Vivarto
4:59 am
Sep 07, 2012
Well, the kind of Judaism that you describe is just Jewish nationalism.
And as for homosexuals I could not care less what they do in private. Marriage, NO, that’s stupid.
Anyway, for your information, modern Israel was build by atheists such as myself. The bravely fought the Arabs while establishing their villages and kibbutzes. Tragically they got infested with political correctness or god-knows-what. They lost their fighting spirit. Now they think that Europe is going to support them if they give Judea and Samaria away to the Arabs.
Of course Europe is not going to move a finger. And America is going to support the strong, so better by strong quick.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Dan
5:25 am
Sep 07, 2012
It might be nationalism if cultivating the land of Israel were all of Judaism, but it isn’t. I referred to it becsuse of your remark about the lack of concern of some Americans. No, the basis of Judsism is the values it transmits. As a practical matter – and history has dadly proved this – there must be a desinated physical territory where Jews who were to practice a specifically Jewish way if life could do so unfettered.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Vivarto
5:31 am
Sep 07, 2012
“here Jews who were to practice a specifically Jewish way if life could do so unfettered”
True, just like Czechs, Danes, and Dutch need a piece of land where they can live according to their culture and traditions.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Vivarto
4:45 am
Sep 09, 2012
Dan, you are talking of my “beliefs”, but I don’t have any beliefs in this sense.
You say that my lack of beliefs defines me as “outside of that community”.
Perhaps outside of the community of religious Jews, but certainly not outside Jewish community. I am a Jew, and a loyal and patriotic member of Jewish community. Staunch Zionist, too.
Jews are a nation, though American Jews got that misconception that they are a religious sect.
Those who understand that we are a nation, a people, not just a religion, will naturally support Jewish nation state of Israel.
Those who think that we are a just a religion, will think that they can just be “Americans”, or “French”, etc of Judaic faith.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Dale Schaan
8:24 am
Sep 19, 2012
Rafi- To call modern Europe Christian is a ridiculous statement. Europe is so post-Christian it has become a crime to hold onto certain Christian teachings and many other teachings are just mocked. And it’s getting worse every year. Hitler was influenced by Darwinism and occult beliefs. He mocked Christians and the Bible. The Inquisitions were carried out by an evil church going directly against everything Jesus taught and stood for. Most of the so called Christians who did evil through history were illiterate or never cracked a Bible open in their entire life. So they blindly followed Pope after Pope in part because the church proclaimed him infallible, contrary to what the Bible teaches!
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Sylvie Schapira
10:19 am
Sep 05, 2012
Vivarto, what do you understand by ‘normal’? And when you refer to Muhammed as a ‘sadistic bastard’, you do realize that you are insulting the prophet? As for the ‘superior’ vs ‘inferior’, At the time that Jews chose the task of God to spread his messages (which they did, but look what others did with that!) there were pagan societies who sacrificed their girl children. So, maybe we had better replace the word ‘superior’ with ‘humane’?
Antisemitic tropes and libels of the sort that Deborah Orr propounds are based on hatred and envy; and hatred and envy corrodes the person who hates and is envious. Her self-esteem suffers and she has to lash out at the most convenient scapegoat.
Agree or Disagree:
3 
0
Vivarto
11:01 am
Sep 05, 2012
>what do you understand by ‘normal’?
Natural, not lost in pretenses.
>And when you refer to Muhammed as a ‘sadistic bastard’, you do realize that you are insulting the prophet?
Surely you are joking? Was Hitler also a prophet in your opinion?
>there were pagan societies who sacrificed their girl children.
Only some barbarian desert Arabs did that.
In the 5th century BCE the Pagan Athenians, were on significantly higher level of development than the monotheistic Jews.
>So, maybe we had better replace the word ‘superior’ with ‘humane’?
The idea that Jewish god was “humane” is a fake modern notion designed to pacify Jews.
Jewish god was savage.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
4
Dan
11:41 pm
Sep 05, 2012
Fifty million people died in European Christian wars in the twentieth century alone. You don’t have to go back to fifth century desert Arab child scarifies to see the true depth of human depravity.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
emes
12:53 am
Sep 09, 2012
Vivarto, you have attached yourself to this website like a nit on a folicle and may I suggest you take your incomprehensible dog-do to another site, perhaps the Beano or Dandy, its about your limit as it seems you talk out of both sides of your mouth and any “intellect” you consider is fulfillling to you, is factually a waste of air time and clogging up screens reminding Jews that people of your ilk learn anti-semitism from their mother’s milk!
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Vivarto
1:05 am
Sep 09, 2012
Your massage violates the policy for this site. It contains personal attack and nothing else.
The fact that my messages appear “incomprehensible” says something about you, rather then my message.
Several people have demonstrated that they do understand my messages.
I don’t know if you can do anything about it, other than just refrain from reading them.
Nobody is forcing you.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
emes
1:29 am
Sep 09, 2012
Vivarto, you claim the “the Jewish Gd is savage!” – and you take offence at my retorts to your idiocincracies? I suppose I should give you some allowances being that you are Polish, as you claim, and that country is antisemitic, your words not mine! – but how dare you insult Jews and their Gd. You also claim to be athiest – that is your choice but don’t go spitting your venom at Jews and, it seems, any other religion in this world, you have also now brought in the Evangelical churches of America – so far you have pissed everyone off and you have a very thin veneer of knowledge to back up your barbs – go read a book!
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Vivarto
3:40 am
Sep 09, 2012
You obviously are either unwilling or unable of comprehending what I am saying.
In either case why bother with this conversation.
I never said I was Polish. But I am not surprised that your, not so sharp mind, read this into what I said.
In any case your anti-Polish prejudice, even in jest is as disgusting as antisemitism, or anti-black racism.
Really, I should not be talking whit you. It would take too much work to explain anything to you, even if you were interested, as it is, you “already know everything”, and “understand everything”. I suggest that you go share your great wisdom with someone who will appreciate it more then me.
Please don’t respond to me any more.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Sylvie Schapira
12:12 pm
Sep 05, 2012
Normal does not mean natural or without pretenses, it means conforming to an average, type or standard. And it is not MY opinion that you have insulted the prophet Muhammed. This is what every fatwah has been about – Muslims will not tolerate any insult to their prophet.
Many ancient tribes sacrificed their children, not just Arabs. During the ancient Olympics, prostitution, non-stop animal sacrifices and pederasty was ‘the norm’. What is ‘higher level of development?’ As for humane being a ‘fake, modern notion designed to pacify Jews’, I don’t recognize this description at all. The Jewish religion is a humane religion – whilst it is not superior.
Agree or Disagree:
2 
1
Vivarto
4:35 pm
Sep 05, 2012
>Normal does not mean natural or without pretenses, it means conforming to an average, type or standard.
Sylvie, you asked me “what I mean by “normal”, not what “normal” means.
If you wanted to know what “normal” means, you could look in a dictionary, and you’d find that it has several meanings, including your’s and mine.
>And it is not MY opinion that you have insulted the prophet Muhammed.
I feel soooooo sorry for poor Muhammad, poor bastard feels insulted.
>This is what every fatwah has been about – Muslims will not tolerate any insult to their prophet.
You are right, just like the Nazis will not tolerate insult to their Fuhrer.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1
Vivarto
4:43 pm
Sep 05, 2012
What was higher about the Athenian civilization of 5th Century?
Math, science, philosophy, geography, theater, drama, music, sculpture, architecture, sports, medicine, participatory democracy, trial by jury… is that enough?
India, too, had extraordinarily high civilization at the same time, while their population believed in 30,000 gods. Surely they had their share of inhumanity, but so did Jews, and all other people.
It is narrow-minded bigotry to think that monotheism is “higher” than polytheism. However in this respect you are normal, as you claim that your particular religion is better, just like Hindus, Christians and Muslims.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
Dan
11:32 pm
Sep 05, 2012
You must learn to distinguish between religions whose adherents have promoted their beliefs by the sword, that is Christianity and Islam, killing millions and forcibly converting the rest, and on the other hand, Judaism, whose adherents did nothing of the kind.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Vivarto
12:33 am
Sep 06, 2012
I must learn?
OK then
Agree or Disagree:
3 
0
Dan
1:50 am
Sep 07, 2012
Vivarto, You are correct. “…Math, science, philosophy, geography, theater, drama, music, sculpture, architecture, sports, medicine, participatory democracy…” Germany had all of these and was the epicenter of world science up to, and immediately before WWII, None of those things confer or imply morality.
Agree or Disagree:
1 
1
Vivarto
2:18 am
Sep 07, 2012
Actually the comparison is weak: Germany was not on higher level that England, Italy, United States, or France, etc. They were in the same ballpark.
But what is your point? That morally Jews were on a higher level than Greeks?
We would have to define morality first.
To me morality is measured by how close we are to following the Golden Rule. Treat others as you want to be treated, don’t treat them as you don’t want to be treated. That’s it.
Perhaps the ancient Jews were more moral than Greeks.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
Dan
3:58 am
Sep 07, 2012
Thank you for quoting the essence of Judaism as originally taught by Rabbi Akiva in ancient times and quoted by Jesus but not practiced by manyillipns of his alleged followers: Treat others as you want to be treated.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Vivarto
5:26 am
Sep 07, 2012
It is doubtful that biblical story of conquest is indeed true. Also the Bible portrays Midianites as perfectly good people. Moses has even married two Midianites women. There are also theories that Moses borrowed his idea of a religion from the Midianites. In any case, the Bible says nothing about them being murderous. Likewise about the other tribes, with a possible exception of the Amalek.
Anyway, my point is that Jews were normal nomad bedouins, wild and murderous, at that stage of their development 3500 years ago. Just like Arabs are today. (At that time Arabs still lived in the trees and had tails.)
Agree or Disagree:
0 
4
Vivarto
4:13 am
Sep 07, 2012
Dan,
The Golden Rule, is not a Jewish invention.
It is the common human base.
Perhaps rabbi Akiva did teach that, but it is certainly doesn’t seem to be the essence of Torah.
In Torah Jews are told by their god to exterminate the Canaanites, I strongly doubt that this can be an example of Golden Rule, but then again, perhaps it is.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
Dan
5:12 am
Sep 07, 2012
Read on and learn what the Canaanites did, their depravity and murderous ways and you will see why they gad to go. Bashir Al Assad, in a nearby neighborhood has recently killed teenty thousand people. He too has to go, according to many Christian leaders sround the world.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Asher
2:49 pm
Sep 05, 2012
This comes down to a series of questions not related to many religions:
Is there a “natural” standard for morality?
If a group is different does it make it superior; or is superiority merely a side-effect of our (voluntary?) association?
If a million people hijacked Christianity or Islam in order to rape/plunder 800 years ago does that make Christianity/Islam representative of their actions? If not why didn’t the leadership speak up?
Are all religions religions with the same scope or impact on our lives, and do we all worship the same deity just because he goes by the same appellation, or because his description meets a common criterion?
What is the common definition of a prophet?
Agree or Disagree:
1 
0
Vivarto
4:51 pm
Sep 05, 2012
There are no objective standards for superiority and inferiority.
There are preferences, and I prefer that Islamic “civilization” stays as far away from me as possible.
I prefer to be in a country where women are treated equally, where there is freedom of speech, critical thought and where Golden Rule is the standard. So from my subjective perspective, Islam is uncivilized, barbaric, primitive, plague.
It is more important what Christianity is now, not what it was 800, or even 300 years ago.
As for scope: Islam is the most controlling.
As for worship, count me out. I am not worshiping any deity.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
Dan
2:00 am
Sep 07, 2012
Vivarto,
If you had listened to Father Charles E. Coughlin’s radio rabidly anti-Jewish sermons to an audience of millions in the United States, not “300 years ago” but during the inter-war years of the twentith century, or. if you were a regular church-goer in Poland, you would realize that your view of quite recent Christianity is a projection of your own benign leanings. They were not and are not shared by millions of others
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Vivarto
2:29 am
Sep 07, 2012
I grow up in Poland and I know all that there is to know about Polish antisemitism.
Don’t put your interpretation into my words. I never denied that most of Eastern Europe, Poland included were extremely antisemitic very recently. Poland still is antisemitic but this is SLOWLY changing, and there are now voices supportive of both Jews and Israel.
However I was talking about Evangelical churches in America. Most of them are strong supporters of Israel.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
3
Tired of Seeing Israel Slammed in the Media – v2 | Blogs about Israel aggregation
4:22 pm
Oct 18, 2012
[...] media bias alerts such as our recent campaign against The Guardian’s anti-Semitic response to the Gilad Shalit swap. The Guardian [...]
Agree or Disagree:
0 
0
Asher
12:16 am
Dec 03, 2012
… and that, ladies and gentlemen is what makes us special: the ability to tolerate diverse opinions without threatening physical harm or abuse. It IS possible to have conflicting opinions and they can ALL be right. Also remember the whole “ad hominem” thing is a Roman invention.
Agree or Disagree:
0 
1