# RO: Palestinian jailed for being Palestinian **URL:** \ **Category:** The BBQ Pit\ **Created:** [July 21, 2010, 3:29pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472 "2010-07-21T15:29:14Z")\ **Posts on this page:** 20\ **Page:** 16
**Author:** ![Ionizer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/5daacb/32.png) [@Ionizer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Ionizer)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 9:36am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/301 "2010-07-27T09:36:03Z")
For the record, I have never been anti- much of anything when it comes to blanket ‘hatred’ or accusing-of-being-bad. Except for baby-fuckers and other such scum that bring it upon themselves. Religion is definitely something I ‘tolerate’ and won’t judge persons individually or by nationality with a widely thrown net-of-presumption. I really have no idea if the ‘culture’ of ‘average Joe/Jane’ in Israel is such that a name, particularly Daniel (or DuDu - is it pronounced dud-duh or doo-doo? honestly curious/snarkiness won’t help as it does cry out for jokes referencing piles of feces) is seen as tending to indicate ‘Jewishness’, and when I use word Jewishness its not meant as ‘bad thing’. If I ask if it indicates Israeli citizenship, it’d leave open possibility of someone not ‘jew’ being named Daniel and other 'loopholed answers, if my narrowing of asked-for answer helps keep assumptive judgement of my intent-for-asking to a dull whisper at most. Thanks for helping me know more about ‘average Israeli Jew’ as I am trying/wanting to be anti-Semite (of which I absolutely am not) and not pre-judging a ‘culture/national identity’ of which I _know_ little about other than what I read/hear. A poster’s ‘credibility-index’ allows me to give weight to what is answered, of course. Thank so much for those staying on-target to this point (which seems to be important afaik) to Mr Kashur’s case) as far as judging-by-name, imho. If I meet a man named, say, Mohammad that kneels/prays a few times a day, I’m pretty certain he’s ‘Muslim’, but I would not ‘take that to the bank’, court particularly, if it helps illustrate my angle of the asking. I’d ask him clearly about it _if_ it was something that mattered to the Nth-degree. Did _she_ ask or assume?? And shit 🙂 ---
**Author:** ![Jackmannii](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/jackmannii/32/311_2.png) [@Jackmannii](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Jackmannii)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 1:41pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/302 "2010-07-27T13:41:06Z")
[QUOTE=ivan astikov] I’d like a clarification by some neutrals as to what makes a person an anti-semite. I thought actions were what makes a person who they are, not thoughts unacted upon? I accept posting my thoughts on here is an action, but can anyone seriously say they are an act of hatred? I’ll take onboard anyone’s opinion other than **Flail Angrily’s** , regarding this matter. [/QUOTE] It’s just one of those unfair situations you’ve got to deal with here on the Dope, **Ivan** , and also to some extent in real life. If you make bigoted assholish remarks here, someone is bound to call you on them, even if you don’t make them in every post (for instance, you’ve contributed some decent lyrics to The Reply Is A Song Lyric thread). As some contributors to Middle East threads have sorrowfully noted, you can’t make bigoted assholish remarks about Israel without some nasty person referring to them as bigoted and assholish - sometimes implying _you_ are a bigoted asshole or even directly labeling you as one, even if you haven’t actually gone out and beaten or killed anybody! It’s intellectual apartheid, is what it is. Anyway, I feel badly for **ivan** , now that he’s revealed (in connection with Third Jihad fears) that there are Muslims under his bed as well as Jews. With a volatile combination like that there’s got to be a lot of noise and fussing, and it’s a wonder **ivan** gets any sleep at all. Unsurprisingly he’s confused and cranky. Let the boy be. ---
**Author:** ![The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/t/9fc348/32.png) [@The\_Flying\_Dutchman](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/The_Flying_Dutchman)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 1:49pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/303 "2010-07-27T13:49:33Z")
> [@amanset](#): > > Question: if you don’t think the rockets are raining down on Israel and you don’t think there are loads of suicide attacks in Israel (according to Wikipedia the most recent one was 2.5 years ago: [List of Palestinian suicide attacks - Wikipedia](http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Palestinian_suicide_attacks)) how can you justify the way Israel treats Palestine, especially the Gaza Strip? > > What actually are the Palestinians doing that justifies the way they are treated? Well, wouldn’t you then say that the treatment has been successful ? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 1:58pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/304 "2010-07-27T13:58:53Z")
> [@Guinastasia](#): > > Uh, that’s exactly what I was trying to say – that a twin switching WOULD constitute rape by deception. DUH. In other words, I can see where this law WOULD work in certain cases. (Such as the case of a twin pretending to be his brother and fucking said brother’s wife) But in the case listed in the OP? NO. > > GAH!!! To my mind, it’s a bit of a slippery slope. I agree that the law ought to be restricted to certain defined cases, but I find it difficult to articulate exactly why, other than that the one ‘feels’ right and the other does not. For example, lying about the _exact_ identity of a person (pretending to be someone’s husband or wife) seems more rightly actionable than lying in general about who you are (example: saying you are single when you are married). Yet in both cases, “but for” the lie, arguably no sex would have occurred. ---
**Author:** ![heatmiserfl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/df705f/32.png) [@heatmiserfl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/heatmiserfl)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 2:23pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/305 "2010-07-27T14:23:11Z")
I can’t tell by wading around the fight between FinnAgain and everyone else, so can someone help me out? Is it true that an Israeli woman hooked up with a man in a bar, then went to the police when she found out he was Palestinian? Is it also true that he was charged and imprisoned with rape based on a law on the books regarding fraudulent identity? If the above is true, how is this not state-sanctioned bigotry? Why are people quibbling over the notion that the law originally had another purpose? I don’t care. The fact is that it was applied by the state to persecute someone based on race/ethnicity. There’s no excuse for it. The judge’s rationalization is chilling and makes me wonder how often the state looks the other way or actively participates in ethnic discrimination within Israel (of course it’s a no-brainer regarding the West Bank and Gaza). ---
**Author:** ![ivan\_astikov](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/i/58f4c7/32.png) [@ivan\_astikov](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/ivan_astikov)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 2:26pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/306 "2010-07-27T14:26:59Z")
> [@Jackmannii](#): > > Anyway, I feel badly for **ivan** , now that he’s revealed (in connection with Third Jihad fears) that there are Muslims under his bed as well as Jews. With a volatile combination like that there’s got to be a lot of noise and fussing, and it’s a wonder **ivan** gets any sleep at all. Unsurprisingly he’s confused and cranky. > > Let the boy be. Yes, that’s right. I’m so confused and cranky I can barely type this post without smacking my keyboard. :rolleyes: ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 2:37pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/307 "2010-07-27T14:37:47Z")
> [@heatmiserfl](#): > > I can’t tell by wading around the fight between FinnAgain and everyone else, so can someone help me out? > > Is it true that an Israeli woman hooked up with a man in a bar, then went to the police when she found out he was Palestinian? Is it also true that he was charged and imprisoned with rape based on a law on the books regarding fraudulent identity? > > If the above is true, how is this not state-sanctioned bigotry? Why are people quibbling over the notion that the law originally had another purpose? I don’t care. The fact is that it was applied by the state to persecute someone based on race/ethnicity. There’s no excuse for it. The judge’s rationalization is chilling and makes me wonder how often the state looks the other way or actively participates in ethnic discrimination within Israel (of course it’s a no-brainer regarding the West Bank and Gaza). The law is that someone who lies about a factor they know the other person is relying on in relation to themselves in order to get sex is guilty, because such a lie means the consent was not meaningful. A fellow hooked up with a Jewish women. That fellow lied about his identity. He claimed to be a Jewish single (in fact, he was a married non-Jew) they had sex. The woman claims she would not have had sex with him if she’d known he was a married non-Jew. These facts are not in doubt, as he pled guilty and is appealing based on the harsh sentence (not because he didn’t in fact lie, or because he thinks the lie wasn’t material). As I’ve said repeatedly, I don’t think the law is a good one. It is over-inclusive. Not all liars ought to be jailed for it; I do not agree with this verdict, because I disagree with the justice of the law; lots of married folks pretend to be single and it is not a good use of the criminal justice system to charge them all. However, under this law he’s without a doubt guilty. On its face, persecution based on racism has nothing to do with it (though of course the judge etc. may well be racist, this cannot be demonstrated by the facts actually in evidence). ---
**Author:** ![sinical\_brit](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/s/48db29/32.png) [@sinical\_brit](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/sinical_brit)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 3:24pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/308 "2010-07-27T15:24:37Z")
Well, what a completely fucked-up thread. I happen to think this is a really interesting story and would like to debate it. However, I find myself having to trawl through the biggest pile of repetitive shite i have ever had the misfortune to read. Anyway - there is an interview with him [here](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/saber-kushour-rape-deception-charge). The article states: "Kushour speaks fluent, unaccented Hebrew, as do many Palestinians living and working in Jerusalem. The woman asked his name and Kushour replied “Dudu” – a common Israeli name. “Since I was a kid everyone calls me Dudu – even my wife calls me Dudu. It’s a nickname.” **At no point, he says, did the woman – who gave her name as Maya – ask if he was Jewish, although he has acknowledged that he said he was single."** Bolding mine. If she didnt ask, and he didnt say, how can he be found guilty for something she presumed ? Isnt ‘buyer beware’ valid here ? Analogy: What if he sold her a car on the Monday. She gets a large cc bill in on the Tuesday and realises she cant afford said car. Can she then ring the police on the Wednesday and cry deception and that she would never have purchased a vehicle off an Arab ? ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 4:07pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/309 "2010-07-27T16:07:06Z")
> [@sinical\_brit](#): > > Well, what a completely fucked-up thread. > > I happen to think this is a really interesting story and would like to debate it. However, I find myself having to trawl through the biggest pile of repetitive shite i have ever had the misfortune to read. > Anyway - there is an interview with him [here](http://www.guardian.co.uk/world/2010/jul/25/saber-kushour-rape-deception-charge). The article states: > > "Kushour speaks fluent, unaccented Hebrew, as do many Palestinians living and working in Jerusalem. The woman asked his name and Kushour replied “Dudu” – a common Israeli name. “Since I was a kid everyone calls me Dudu – even my wife calls me Dudu. It’s a nickname.” **At no point, he says, did the woman – who gave her name as Maya – ask if he was Jewish, although he has acknowledged that he said he was single."** Bolding mine. > > If she didnt ask, and he didnt say, how can he be found guilty for something she presumed ? Isnt ‘buyer beware’ valid here ? > > Analogy: What if he sold her a car on the Monday. She gets a large cc bill in on the Tuesday and realises she cant afford said car. Can she then ring the police on the Wednesday and cry deception and that she would never have purchased a vehicle off an Arab ? This makes it all the less likely that the sigificant lie was about his _ethnicity_. He admits that he lied - about being _single_. Remember that there were two lies in issue here: (1) that he was Jewish when he wasn’t; and (2) that he was single when he was married. The attention of this thread has all been on lie #1, because the implications of that raise the racism concern. However, according to at least one expert cited in the articles upthread, it was lie #2 which proved most decisive - and is the reason that an appeal from the conviction (as opposed to the sentence) may be difficult. In short he allegedly lied about being a “Jewish single”. The argument has all been about him lying about being a ' **Jewish** single" whereas it may be the case that it was more significant that he lied about being a “Jewish **single** ”. ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 4:42pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/310 "2010-07-27T16:42:03Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > Why would a guy who did _not_ in fact lie claim to feel “bad about what he did”, or make the argument that lying about being a pilot etc. shouldn’t amount to rape? Why would he be arguing that the _punishment for what he did_ was too severe? Well you asked why a person would confess to something that they did not do. People do it for lots of reasons, and for crimes carrying a hell of a lot more serious penalty. It seems from his comments he did lie. Whether that in and of itself meets the elements of the crime, I don’t know, and unless I see the law itself, I will never know. I’ll admit to being a little jaded on the criminal justice system in general after a decision in a case I worked on came down last week. My belief in justice in any country is at a ridiculously low level. ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 7:04pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/311 "2010-07-27T19:04:53Z")
> [@FinnAgain](#): > > And you’d be wrong. Neither is an accusation of anti-semitism. > An anti-Semite is someone who hates Jews and/or believes negative things about them as a group. So we aren’'t anti-semites, we are just people who say things about Israel that we wouldn’t say if Israel was full of blacks instead of being full of Jews? Or we are content tostand by while anti-semites say anti-semitic things because, well, they are jews after all. > [@](#): > > And while I’m at it, I’ve called out Sam Stone, for instance, over his errors when he’s taken a pro-Israel position on a few occasions. How many of the anti-Israel brigade here have _ever_ done the same for people arguing an anti-Israel position? I remember people jumping down that one guy’s throat. English was obviously his second language, I forget his name. I corrected a few people about teh whole “baording the maru is illegal!!” thing. I think there is plenty of balance here without you getting shrill in your defense of Israel. > [@](#): > > Honestly what would the reaction be if we changed your admission of anti-Israel bigotry to one of kneejerk anti-gay (or black, or whoever) bigotry? I think you are confusing racism and anti-israeli sentiment. A racist is going to hate a black man no matter what he does. I will stop criticizing Israel if Israel stops being an asshole. I think a better analogy would be to admit that your general criticisms of the teabaggers became a kneejerk reaction because of Mark Williams. Now if I had said that your rantings have made me a have a kneejerk hatred for Jews, then that would be a decent analogy but since you aren’t calling me an anti-semite … > [@](#): > > No, they kept bringing it up. And even if they didn’t, what does that tell you that people will automatically make certain accusations without bothering to check the facts first? It wasn’t exactly hard. The search terms? “International law maritime blockade, -israel”. If you’ll recall, almost noone in the media giot that fact straight either. I don’t remember anyone from teh major news sources even mentioning the San Remo manual. > [@](#): > > In the very thread you were just discussing, I mentioned many times that I thought that the blockade was needlessly harsh and caused undue suffering among the people of Gaza. You’re right, you did call certain aspects fo the blockade stupid. I had been qualifying this statement with that example (I mention your criticiasm of the blockade of coriander) but I left it out this time. It was unfair to say you NEVER criticize Israel. > [@](#): > > if Israel didn’t halt all settlement expansion immediately that the US should turn off the spigot and case all aid. Just a few posts later, Red Fury was back trolling me and claiming that I never criticize Israel and support everything they do. And, predictably, the anti-Israel posters in the thread didn’t call him to task. I don’t know if i was part of that thread but are you saying that the settlements are wrong or are you saying that the settlements are provoking the US? ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 7:12pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/312 "2010-07-27T19:12:15Z")
> [@amanset](#): > > What actually are the Palestinians doing that justifies the way they are treated? Its what they are NOT doing. They aren’t rounding up hamas leaders and handing them over to the Israelis. Personally I am still waiting for the Palestinian Gandhi to emerge and march a bunch of Palestinians towards the checkpoint surrounding Gaza and let the IDF beat the crap out of them. Do this in front of camera a few times and you get to draw the new map of Israel (as long as Jerusalem is at least split between Israel and Palestine). ---
**Author:** ![Damuri\_Ajashi](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/d/898d66/32.png) [@Damuri\_Ajashi](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Damuri_Ajashi)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 7:20pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/313 "2010-07-27T19:20:30Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > lots of married folks pretend to be single and it is not a good use of the criminal justice system to charge them all. However, under this law he’s without a doubt guilty. On its face, persecution based on racism has nothing to do with it (though of course the judge etc. may well be racist, this cannot be demonstrated by the facts actually in evidence). If lots of marries folks lie about being married, then why this guy? Why this time? You can’t prove racism here because the law does apply and there isn’t a long history of this law being applied like this one way or the other (so my previous analogy of drug laws being selectively enforced against blacks is not really on point). Is this simply the first time that someone has been caught lying about being married? ---
**Author:** ![newcomer](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/n/e5b9ba/32.png) [@newcomer](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/newcomer)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 7:33pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/314 "2010-07-27T19:33:28Z")
> [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > Personally I am still waiting for the Palestinian Gandhi to emerge and march a bunch of Palestinians towards the checkpoint surrounding Gaza and let the IDF beat the crap out of them. Do this in front of camera a few times and you get to draw the new map of Israel (as long as Jerusalem is at least split between Israel and Palestine). What makes you think that even if that would happen things would roll out as they did in India? Knowing what we know about this conflict – the most obvious thing being that Israelis are not British – how can anyone come up with this idea for conflict resolution is beyond me. ---
**Author:** ![heatmiserfl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/df705f/32.png) [@heatmiserfl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/heatmiserfl)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 8:05pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/315 "2010-07-27T20:05:44Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > The law is that someone who lies about a factor they know the other person is relying on in relation to themselves in order to get sex is guilty, because such a lie means the consent was not meaningful. I don’t care that he’s being convicted for lying. The fact is, he lied about being Palestinian. Obviously, a Jew wouldn’t have to lie about being Jewish. In other words, the woman thought a Palestinian was below her and the state supported the woman’s racism. If it was only because he was married, the judge wouldn’t have said what he did regarding a “Jewish Batchelor”. The judge should have said that the state does not get involved in matters of consent based on race/ethnicity. What is chilling, which seems to go over some people’s head, is that some of the comments seemed so matter of fact. It’s sort of a given that Palestinians are a step down. ---
**Author:** ![RedFury](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/r/ec9cab/32.png) [@RedFury](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/RedFury)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 8:56pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/316 "2010-07-27T20:56:31Z")
> [@heatmiserfl](#): > > …What is chilling, which seems to go over some people’s head, is that some of the comments seemed so matter of fact. It’s sort of a given that Palestinians are a step down. Hardly “chilling” when you consider it’s a fact w/many an Israeli and hard-core supporters of same. For fucks sake, it’s exactly how they’ve been running their “democracy” for many a year. However I do agree that the amount of support Israel gets from The Usual Suspects on here is indeed, _mindless_. Might as well have, in many cases, drones posting instead. ---
**Author:** ![Malthus](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/m/85f322/32.png) [@Malthus](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/Malthus)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 9:00pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/317 "2010-07-27T21:00:26Z")
> [@heatmiserfl](#): > > I don’t care that he’s being convicted for lying. The fact is, he lied about being Palestinian. Obviously, a Jew wouldn’t have to lie about being Jewish. Obviously they would - if they were a Jewish guy and wanted to have sex with a nationalistic Arab woman. > [@](#): > > In other words, the woman thought a Palestinian was below her and the state supported the woman’s racism. A woman is perfectly entitled to be as racist as a whole barrel of KKK members regarding who she will sleep with. > [@](#): > > If it was only because he was married, the judge wouldn’t have said what he did regarding a “Jewish Batchelor”. The judge should have said that the state does not get involved in matters of consent based on race/ethnicity. Why should lying about one’s ethnicity be privileged over lying about one’s job or marital status? > [@](#): > > What is chilling, which seems to go over some people’s head, is that some of the comments seemed so matter of fact. It’s sort of a given that Palestinians are a step down. Not a “given” at all. It is simply a "given’ that _some women would find the ethnicity of their partner an important consideration_. Really, is that controversial? ---
**Author:** ![villa](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/v/bc79bd/32.png) [@villa](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/villa)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 9:08pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/318 "2010-07-27T21:08:45Z")
> [@Malthus](#): > > A woman is perfectly entitled to be as racist as a whole barrel of KKK members regarding who she will sleep with. No one is arguing that. The question is whether the power of the state should be utilized to assist someone being as racist as a whole barrel of KKK members regarding who she will sleep with. ---
**Author:** ![heatmiserfl](https://avatars.discourse-cdn.com/v4/letter/h/df705f/32.png) [@heatmiserfl](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/heatmiserfl)\ **Post date:** [July 27, 2010, 9:16pm UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/319 "2010-07-27T21:16:08Z")
> [@villa](#): > > > [@Malthus](#): > > > > A woman is perfectly entitled to be as racist as a whole barrel of KKK members regarding who she will sleep with. > > No one is arguing that. The question is whether the power of the state should be utilized to assist someone being as racist as a whole barrel of KKK members regarding who she will sleep with. Exactly. Malthus, you insist on glossing over this point. The state is not only assisting in racism but in an extreme way. The guy is charged with rape. I wonder what happens in a prison when a Palestinian is charged with raping a Jewish woman. ---
**Author:** ![FinnAgain](https://sea3.discourse-cdn.com/straightdope/user_avatar/boards.straightdope.com/finnagain/32/12500_2.png) [@FinnAgain](https://boards.straightdope.com/u/FinnAgain)\ **Post date:** [July 28, 2010, 3:01am UTC](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472/320 "2010-07-28T03:01:56Z")
Simply an amusing aside: [ > [@](#): > > Recently, a few political scientists have begun to discover a human tendency deeply discouraging to anyone with faith in the power of information. It’s this: Facts don’t necessarily have the power to change our minds. In fact, quite the opposite. In a series of studies in 2005 and 2006, researchers at the University of Michigan found that when misinformed people, particularly political partisans, were exposed to corrected facts in news stories, they rarely changed their minds. In fact, they often became even more strongly set in their beliefs. Facts, they found, were not curing misinformation. Like an underpowered antibiotic, facts could actually make misinformation even stronger. > > This bodes ill for a democracy, because most voters — the people making decisions about how the country runs — aren’t blank slates. They already have beliefs, and a set of facts lodged in their minds. The problem is that sometimes the things they think they know are objectively, provably false. And in the presence of the correct information, such people react very, very differently than the merely uninformed. Instead of changing their minds to reflect the correct information, they can entrench themselves even deeper. ]([http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how\_facts\_backfire/?page=full](http://www.boston.com/bostonglobe/ideas/articles/2010/07/11/how_facts_backfire/?page=full)) Anyways… > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > So we aren’'t anti-semites, we are just people who say things about Israel that we wouldn’t say if Israel was full of blacks instead of being full of Jews? Or we are content tostand by while anti-semites say anti-semitic things because, well, they are jews after all. You are missing the point _again_. Israel is, in point of fact, populated by quote a few Jews who are also black ethopians. I’m sure if Israel was populated by pureblooded Vikings, the situation would be the same. That’s because it’s a strikingly partisan anti-Israel movement, and only a few members of it are actual anti-Semites. And anti-Semitism is tolerated by many of your fellow travelers not because “well, they are Jews after all” but because it’s being used against _Israel_. That’s the point that I keep making and you keep missing. That’s why, for instance, the “you can’t really trust American Jews because they may have Dual Loyalty and be willing to betray America for Israel or just so brainwashed by their Dual Loyalty that their judgments can’t even be trusted (as long as they differ from an anti-Israel position, at least) so we can’t trust them.” is okay but “you can’t really trust American Jews because they love money so much” wouldn’t receive anywhere nearly as much traction. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > I think you are confusing racism and anti-israeli sentiment. … No. You are confusing racism and anti-Israel sentiment, I am not. Again, having a kneejerk anti-black narrative and a kneejerk anti-Israel narrative are not totally disparate because one group is a race and the other is a nation. It just means that one is racism and the other is bigotry. And again, look at your own admission. It wasn’t “Whenever I see the facts and objectively analyze them, and then come to the conclusion that wrongdoing was perpetrated, I…” it was that whenever you see any new information you automatically and habitually try to slot it into an anti-Israel narrative and you have to try to work against that tendency. How is that any different from “Each time I see a black man I have think that maybe he’s going to rob me and I clutch my wallet a bit tighter, and I really have to try to work against that impulse.” (Yes, other than the fact that one is a nation and the other is a racial group, so what?) > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > If you’ll recall, almost noone in the media giot that fact straight either. I don’t remember anyone from teh major news sources even mentioning the San Remo manual. And what does that tell you? Remember, the very, absolute first hit on a google search. > [@Damuri\_Ajashi](#): > > You’re right, you did call certain aspects fo the blockade stupid. I had been qualifying this statement with that example (I mention your criticiasm of the blockade of coriander) but I left it out this time. It was unfair to say you NEVER criticize Israel. The point is I have often repeatedly Israel (wonder, then, why it is that so many of your fellow travelers on this board prefer to say that I never do or I suppose everything they do, often in the same thread as I’ve just criticized something.) Recently, for instance, I said that Israel’s alliance with the apartheid regime in SA was “morally reprehensible” and then, as it was in GD, went on to point out the economic-political realities that had motivated that decision. People immediately claimed that I was trying to justify something I’d just said was “morally reprehensible.” I took it further, and used an analogy talking about how if a crazed, knife-wielding maniac had a hostage and the police rushed him, causing him to kill the hostage that it wasn’t justifying hostage-murder, merely explaining the factors involved. Rather incomprehensibly, someone actually alleged that I was using Israel as the _police officer in that analogy._ At least one person (maybe more, I don’t remember the specifics) actually said that, yes, they were angry because I was condemning Israeli behavior and trying to put it in a historical context when really what I should be doing is just voicing hatred/anger/whatever and leaving it at that. As for just a couple other that I have ready links to: [ > [@](#): > > I’ll post it again: The US should, certainly, make it clear that we’ll cut off the spigot if there is any new construction of the settlements, at all. ]([http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10674990&postcount=42](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10674990&postcount=42)) [ > [@](#): > > I’m well aware that there are numerous legitimate grievances among the Palestinian people, among but not limited to those in the West Bank and Gaza. > > There are legitimate concerns about racism and discrimination even for Arabs in Israel, but the courts have consistently come down against such actions. There are problems for those Palestinians who live in refugee camps in other countries, many of which have adopted laws designed to keep them living in the camps, and even made it illegal for them to find work outside of the camps. Other nations, like Lebanon, have a history of treating them very roughly and just a couple years ago, the Lebanese army shelled the hell out of refugee camp. IIRC they weren’t using surgical strikes either. Palestinians in the West Bank do not have freedom of movement even within the West Bank itself. Many have family/friends in Jordan but are unable to visit them most of the time due to the Jordanian border policies. There are valid demands that they have increased water rights, that Gazans have increased fishing rights. Fatah is corrupt and Hamas are theocratic thuggish genocidal lunatics. Much of the aid/money which is sent never get into the hands of the people. Unemployment is massive and they are unable to import/export freely. Ironically as well, one of their main trading partners has always been Israel, and due to security restrictions they are unable to travel and work in Israel without great difficulty and delay. Even ambulances have trouble traveling freely, largely due to the fact that there is a history of ambulances being used to smuggle weapons/bombs/terrorists. > > Etc, etc, etc. That’s just a smattering off the top of my head. > > Of course they have valid demands. They want a sovereign state with viable agricultural and water rights, with open borders so that they can travel to see family in Jordan or Egypt, Israel or wherever, or simply vacation. They want open airspace and a national airline. They want the ability to send fishing boats as deep into international waters as they see fit. They want a decent standard of living and a viable economy. They want the ability to visit their holy sites and don’t want security checkpoints on their land or, for that matter, to have to be treated as possible enemy combatants at every checkpoint in Israel proper. They want to have sovereign control and ownership over the land they are living on now. Which, of course, has legal but not necessarily pragmatic problems. For roughly 400 years, the vast majority of land in the region was Miri or waste land, that is, land which could not be privately owned and which tenants could only ‘rent’ by continuously cultivating it. This system was kept by both the British and Jordanians when they were the sovereign powers in control of the land. So legal claims to property rights fall short, but it is obvious that a pragmatic solution must be reached. I have gone on record, numerous times in the last week or two unless I miss my guess, as stating that Clinton’s Bridging Proposal would be a very good goal to shoot for (with modifications in Final Status negotiations), as after land swaps and periods of increasingly scaled back Israeli control to guarantee a smooth transition, it gave (what would become) a sovereign PA roughly 97% of the West Bank and East Jerusalem. I’ve gone on record as saying that the US should apply its economic influence to attempt to get all settlement expansion stopped. I’ve gone on record as stating that there is a pragmatic necessity to provide funds Palestinians who were dispossessed, largely because any Palestinian territory itself must have viable social services as soon as possible, but also because it would be a good gesture to settle bad blood and the Final Status of the refugees. I believe that it would have to be negotiated because, as pointed out above many didn’t even own the land they were living on. A unilateral decision of how much they were owed would be silly, and most evenhanded folks recognize that. Israel no more gets to determine what the refugees should get than does Abbas or Haniyah, or the Saudis or whoever. But a negotiated settlement allows an agreed upon value to be set and paid rather than simply declared by fiat. > > I’d add that I wish that any peace deal would also include the participation of the Arab powers, who would likewise compensate Jewish disposed citizens from the period around 1948, but I recognize that the world as a whole simply doesn’t care about the fact that they had their property/homes stripped from them and they’re unlikely to ever get any political traction because Israel already absorbed the cost of repatriating most of them while the Palestinian leadership itself and the Arab regimes in which their refugee camps have been based have done their best throughout the decades to keep them in camps as a political issue and (in the case of the Arab governments) to distract their own people and give them an external enemy. As the old sad joke goes, the Egyptians are more than willing to fight to the last Palestinian. > > I want there to be a viable two state solution with peace security, prosperity and a high standard of living for both sides. And I want it ASAP. > > I’m also not coming at the issue from a position of ignorance. I understand that without a real peace, there can be no peaceful coexistence (I’d hope that’s obvious but based on the number of people who want Hamas’ demands to be met, it seems like some people still miss that fact). Or as put on Mideastweb: > > > [@](#): > > > > There is no real evidence that Hamas positions on the Jewish question have changed. Sheik Yunus al-Astal, a Hamas legislator and imam, stated in 2008: : > > …we are sure that the Holocaust is still to come upon the Jews. > > Given the above, it is utterly astounding that some evidently deluded people believe that the the best way to support peace is to support the Hamas movement. That is their problem. > > It is obvious that if Hamas were given freedom of movement and open borders tomorrow, all we would see is Hamas being within rocket/mortar range of each and every single Israeli city, town, and village. Any honest observer knows what happens next. And, it is obvious (as least to me) that no sovereign, democratic government on the planet would accept such attacks continuing. Any government which allowed Hamas to rocket Tel Avid would find itself ousted by a no confidence vote virtually immediately, and would be replaced by a massively hawkish government as the pendulum swung in the other direction to compensate. By the same token, if any sovereign Palestinian state waited a little while and then launched a war, we’d just be back to square one. > > I have seen (some) good signs from Fatah in the West Bank however, as they recently controlled their populace and didn’t permit violent protests to develop ‘a stone’s throw’ away from Israeli troops. Although that in and of itself has produced resentment, it does seem that Fatah is actually interested in a peaceful government with sovereignty. Oh, to be sure, it still spews the same rhetoric. But while Hamas’ rejectionist position is proven by its actions, Fatah’s rejectionist rhetoric (might be) falsified by its willingness to achieve domestic calm so as to be a viable negotiating partner for Israel. Even children who are radicals would have a hard time continuing in that vein if their home was peaceful and prosperous and, especially, if the PA was active in cracking down on terrorism and genocidal incitement. > > I believe that the best way to marginalize Hamas is to have a sovereign West Bank which can demonstrate to them the ‘carrot’ of peaceful relations, and provide a glaring object lesson as to what path works, and what leads to misery and bloodshed for both nations. I believe that the sooner we get a viable two state solution, the sooner the citizens in Gaza will start slitting some Hamas throats. And the sooner there is a viable pair of states who can coexist in peace and prosperity, the revenue from tourism alone will help the Palestinians’ economic and social interests immensely. > > I’m not unaware of the complexities of the situation, I just find myself having to debunk counter-factual claims much more often than talking about Where We Go From Here. Anybody can check out, for instance, my disagreements with DSeid. He and I disagree on some fundamental points, like the effectiveness of his ‘snapping turtle’ strategy of defense. But I have never known him to be anything other than scrupulously honest and accurate, and he mythbusts both traditional Zionist and anti-Zionist positions that aren’t factual. Because he’s able to see nuance and keep his position grounded in fact rather than myth, he and I can disagree (and even contradict each other on factual points with valid cites and see those points conceded) . I’d be more than happy to discuss pragmatic solutions to this conflict which has gone on far too long. But that is hampered by constant myth busting, or people who simply argue to support their agenda, or who distort the facts to score rhetorical points, or what have you. > > The situation, as one really should expect for a conflict that’s been going on for more than a century and which involved much of the civilized world, is not without its complexities and nuances. Whitewashing the situation in order to shill for an agenda simply makes honest debate that much harder. ]([http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10745403&postcount=222](http://boards.straightdope.com/sdmb/showpost.php?p=10745403&postcount=222)) And: > [@villa](#): > > The question is whether the power of the state should be utilized to assist someone being as racist as a whole barrel of KKK members regarding who she will sleep with. No. The question is if a totally neutral and objective law that says people have the right not to be deceived into sexual relations should apply even if a woman wants people of her own ethnic/religious group as partners. The suggestion, to start with, that a Greek girl wanting to find a Greek boy, or an Indian woman wanting to find an Indian man, or a Jewish girl wanting to find a Jewish guy is “racist” is without merit. Then there’s the fact that the law is neutral (something that people were, previously, disputing and arguing should be the case if it isn’t). What, are they supposed to come up with a category of “legal reasons why a woman can reject a potential sexual partner?” Wanting to marry a brain surgeon is okay, wanting to marry someone who grew up in a similar culture to yours is not and you can be deceived into having sex based on that metric but not neurosurgeon status. That’s not how the law is written. So even if she was being racist (which hasn’t been shown, only insinuated), then the law has to be applied because the law is neutral. And even if she was being racist, then yes of course the law should still be applied because it’s about a person’s right to choose their own partner and not a person’s right to make the correct choices that are both moral and show a good personality. The argument is that consent is not actually obtained if fraud is used. \*This holds true even if the fraud was one that you support. \* In a legal system where rape-by-fraud is a crime, then all that matters is that fraud led to sex which otherwise wouldn’t have happened. It’s no more acceptable, in context, than forcible rape. We wouldn’t argue that legal system had no right to defend someone’s choice if they had decided not to sleep with someone because they weren’t of their ethnic group and the person forced himself on her anyways. And, under that legal system, both force and fraud _both_ invalidate consent. You wouldn’t be arguing that a woman doesn’t have a right to withhold consent if the reason she’s doing so is racist, would you? [Previous page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472.md?page=15) [Next page](https://boards.straightdope.com/t/ro-palestinian-jailed-for-being-palestinian/547472.md?page=17)