An Islamist preacher’s speeches that allegedly painted Jewish people as “vile and treacherous” were not racist but formed part of a robust discussion, his lawyer has argued.

In one of his speeches, he appears to blame the roots of “the enmity that we see today” on “none other than the Jews … because their forefathers had shown the same enmity to the Prophet (Mohammed)”.

Haddad is being sued by Executive Council of Australian Jewry co-chief executive Peter Wertheim and deputy president Robert Goot, who are seeking the removal of the allegedly racist speeches.

They also want Haddad to be barred from making similar comments again.

Wertheim told the Federal Court on Tuesday the speeches used “overtly dehumanising” language.

“Making derogatory generalisations, calling Jews a vile and treacherous people, calling them rats and cowards … are things which I think would be experienced by most Jews as dehumanising,” he said.

His barrister Peter Braham SC told the court the speeches drew on a large range of offensive tropes and were designed to threaten, humiliate and denigrate all Jewish people.

The court was told Haddad, who is also known as Abu Ousayd, addressed a camera and engaged with media coverage of his commentary.

But his barrister Andrew Boe argued the preacher’s speeches were intended for a private Muslim audience of 40 people and he was not responsible for publishing them online.

He said it was unlikely any Jewish people would have come across the speeches if they had not received coverage by media organisations.

“It would be analogous to a person of a prudish sensitivity seeking out pornography on the web and then complaining about being offended by it,” Boe said.

Haddad denies breaching anti-discrimination laws and claims he was delivering historical and religious lectures on historical events from the Koran and the war in Gaza.

The speeches occurred in the context of a vigorous political debate characterised by an intensity of feeling on both sides and set against the background of a long religious history, Boe said.

He advocated for the preservation of free speech and argued the boundaries of debate couldn’t be set so narrow as to exclude views which were not polite, bland or balanced.

Wertheim said being exposed to challenging ideas in robust conversations did not insult him “as long as they don’t cross the boundary into vilification”.

His lawyer told the court that the Jewish community lived with “a communal memory of past persecution and which remains conscious of threats to its safety by reason of race”.

Readers seeking support can contact Lifeline on 13 11 14 or beyond blue on 1300 22 4636.