Arab guilty of rape after consensual sex with Jew

[Renasko]

I was deceived into thinking this thread would be worth reading. Rape! Prosecutor?!

[Swordfish]

No, any particular reason why I should? I'm making the logical move of taking your words at face value.

You keep using those words 'face value'and 'logical'.

I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

[Eurytus]

She clearly made completely sure of who he was prior to having sex with him.

Sabbar Kashur, a 30-year-old delivery man, met the woman by chance in West Jerusalem, the Jewish sector, and within minutes of falling into conversation, they headed to a nearby office block to have sex. Mr Kashur told the woman, who has not been identified, that his name was Daniel to make her believe that he was Jewish, and that he was single and looking for a long-term relationship. It was only later that she learned he was Palestinian, prompting her to file charges of rape.

http://www.independent.co.uk/news/world/middle-east/arab-who-posed-as-a-jew-jailed-for-rape-by-deception-2031252.html

The woman initially accused Mr Kashur under oath of a brutal rape against her consent, a charge that carries a heavy jail sentence. But when Mr Kashur's lawyer mounted his own investigation and disproved her claims, the Jerusalem District Court agreed to a plea bargain

Hmmm

[All-for-Joffrey]

You keep using those words 'face value'and 'logical'.

I do not think they mean what you think they mean.

Actually, I only used face value and logical all but once (in the post you just quoted mind you). Also please note that "face value" is not one word, but two.

Galactus defended the ruling, I took his words at "face value" rather than some attempt to play devil's advocate(if that's what it was) and lumped him in with the prosecutors because a court decision that was clearly based in existing racism and bigotry.

[Galactus]

Actually, I only used face value and logical all but once (in the post you just quoted mind you). Also please note that "face value" is not one word, but two.

Galactus defended the ruling, I took his words at "face value" rather than some attempt to play devil's advocate(if that's what it was) and lumped him in with the prosecutors because a court decision that was clearly based in existing racism and bigotry.

Ah, noobs, they are so precious. :rofl:

[DanteGabriel]

Wow, I really can't see any reason for you to defend this other then shallow, unabashed bigotry and racism. Let me guess, Israeli Arabs totally have equal rights, right?

People like you are precisely what is wrong with the world.

I disagree with Galactus's opinion here but from what I know of him, he's responsible for very little of what's wrong with the world. I think the "people like you" thing is uncalled for, and I highly doubt that bigotry is behind his opinion. He's just bloody-mindeded. ;)

[Galactus]

I disagree with Galactus's opinion here but from what I know of him, he's responsible for very little of what's wrong with the world. I think the "people like you" thing is uncalled for, and I wouldn't jump to bigotry as the only possible reason for his opinion. He's just bloody-mindeded. ;)

I'm mostly amused by the entir situation. It's the first time I've been accused of being biased in favour of israelis. :rofl: :rofl:

[All-for-Joffrey]

I disagree with Galactus's opinion here but from what I know of him, he's responsible for very little of what's wrong with the world. I think the "people like you" thing is uncalled for, and I highly doubt that bigotry is behind his opinion. He's just bloody-mindeded. ;)

It was the most apparent reason why he would defend a completely uncalled for ruling because, as others have pointed out, that's what the court ruling was clearly based on. The only other reason I can think of is an obsession with strictly uniform legal codes and court rulings -- which is also extremely misguided, if not quite so odious.

I'm mostly amused by the entir situation. It's the first time I've been accused of being biased in favour of israelis.

And I am expected to know this...how?

[Swordfish]

Actually, I only used face value and logical all but once (in the post you just quoted mind you).

Yes..... I can both read and count.

You have my apologies for the fact that you are missing the reference.

Also please note that "face value" is not one word, but two.

Indeed. hence my use of the plurals 'words' rather than the singular 'word'.

Galactus defended the ruling, I took his words at "face value" rather than some attempt to play devil's advocate(if that's what it was) and lumped him in with the prosecutors because a court decision that was clearly based in existing racism and bigotry. I apologize that you are missing the reference.

You keep using those words, 'face value'.

i do not think they mean what you think they mean.

[Galactus]

And I am expected to know this...how?

By say, reading the forum and paying attention to posters? Or y'know, just not jumping to conclusions like a bloody fool.

Although that would deprive us of some high-grade comedy :P

[All-for-Joffrey]

By say, reading the forum and paying attention to posters? Or y'know, just not jumping to conclusions like a bloody fool.

Although that would deprive us of some high-grade comedy :P

I still think it was a logical conclusion, especially given the blind Israel-can-do-no-wrong rhetoric you hear all the time in the US and western Europe but nonetheless you have my apologies for the untrue accusation. And no, I don't think I should be expected to ID a poster with every post I read. In fact I think it's kind of arrogant and elitist to assume that I should remember someone's exact beliefs and statements based off of previous threads and posts.

[DanteGabriel]

Just fucking stop digging already. You leveled an unsupported accusation of racism at someone. Suck it up and move on.

[Galactus]

I still think it was a logical conclusion, especially given the blind Israel-can-do-no-wrong rhetoric you hear all the time in the US and western Europe but nonetheless you have my apologies for the untrue accusation. And no, I don't think I should be expected to ID a poster with every post I read. In fact I think it's kind of arrogant and elitist to assume that I should remember someone's exact beliefs and statements based off of previous threads and posts.

No, you made a completely baffling leap of logic, supported by no evidence whatsover, indeed, it was based solely on your own prejudice, with no consideration of logic, plausibility or even common sense. Which happens occasionally, you just picked an ironcially hilarious target. (I'm eagerly awaiting you accusing SOTM for being a closet member of the KKK and sologdin or being a conservative)

[The Progressive]

So is there any case law precedent in the Israeli legal system in which a Jewish male who made fraudulent claims about himself to obtain sexual favor from women were similarly punished?

Because if there isn't, this would look like blatant institutional racism.

[DanteGabriel]

Hey AFJ, sending me an angry and illogical PM doesn't help your case. If you want to keep up your flailing wounded rhetoric, save me the inbox space and take your lumps in public.

[The Marquis de Leech]

Oh, no doubt. That said, I see nothing wrong with the principle of the ruling, which is at least somwhat logical.

The problem with the logic though is that it can be used to generate absurdities unless you put some sort of "deception standard" up. I mean, applying the same logic it would be rape to tell a woman that you work for Burger King, rather than McDonalds.

People would normally give consent to their spouse, which is why spouse impersonation is rape. In this case the woman gave consent to a stranger - which was her own damn choice.

[Mad Monkey]

Hey AFJ, sending me an angry and illogical PM doesn't help your case. If you want to keep up your flailing wounded rhetoric, save me the inbox space and take your lumps in public.

Anyone who still thinks that Joffrey was a good King kind of has to rely on illogic, don't you think?

Because if there isn't, this would look like blatant institutional racism.

I wish there was an archive for all the things that people on the Internet want to know. Something like Google, except with real information instead of porn, spam, and irrelevant Youtube videos about startled gerbils.

[The Progressive]

The incredible thing about US court rulings is that the decisions often cite case laws as precedent, which could be easily look up for reference.

I willingly admit that I'm not familiar with how Israeli court rulings are formulated, perhaps they don't do that at all.

[Tears of Lys]

So is there any case law precedent in the Israeli legal system in which a Jewish male who made fraudulent claims about himself to obtain sexual favor from women were similarly punished?

Because if there isn't, this would look like blatant institutional racism.

This.

Sounds a bit weird, though. The woman has sex within 15 minutes of meeting a guy and then is horrified to learn that he's ARAB! Oh, the humanity! :wacko:

[Deluge]

As far as the theoretical notion of deception goes, I would say that it is sleazy, but not rape (with the exception of spousal impersonation, though I have no idea how someone could pull that off). As far as this specific case goes, I would say it is almost certainly racism.