Apartheid justice: Brown man impersonates white overlord in name of romance, gets convicted of rape

by Yaniv Reich on July 19, 2010

It is difficult to recall such a striking example of personal and institutional racism, which allows justice to be meted out so differentially, so disproportionately to individuals from different ethnic groups.

Of course, the issue has nothing to do with black men impersonating white men, as the title suggests. Rather, the actual story centers on an Arab man who was just convicted of rape in Israel and sentenced to 18 months in prison.

Did he force himself on his “victim”? No.

Was she incapacitated through substance abuse and he took advantage of her? No.

Was she underage, a minor who was taken advantage of by someone of greater size/age/authority? No.

Did the girl want to have sex with him? Yes.

Did she get so horrified when she learned that she just had consensual sex with an Arab that she decided to charge him with rape? Yes.

Was an Arab convicted for the crime of pretending he was a Jew? Yes.

Unbelievable! I cannot even believe I have to write this.

According to Yediot Ahronot (Note: Google translation of original Hebrew), the judge recognized this was not a case of rape, but explained that the Arab’s impersonation of a Jew to try and win over the girl amounted to a violent scheme to overcome her “opposition”. Because, of course, she would naturally be “opposed” to his advances if she knew he was “only” an Arab rather than a full-fledged human—a Jew.

Poor guy, all he did was express in a “significant romantic relationship”, as was explained in court.

The apartheid judge went on to explain the functions of the court in protecting the overlords from their lustful minions:

“The court must protect the public interest against sophisticated criminals who use sweet, slippery tongues to deceive innocent victims, with the price paid by sanctity of body and spirit.”

Indeed, consensual sex between two adults supposedly interested in long-term romance violates apartheid’s dictums for “sanctity of body and spirit”. . . . but only when the two parties come from different sides of the psychological segregation barrier.

Related Posts:

{ 3 comments… read them below or add one }

1 asherpat July 28, 2010 at 12:03 pm

How about: brown man lies (that he is single, while he is a married father to two) to have SEX (not “romance”), gets convicted in a court of law.

I also wonder, what would have happened if a Christian man in Saudi Arabia would get sex by lying to an unmarried muslim woman that he is a muslim. Just wonder.

2 asherpat July 29, 2010 at 2:33 pm

Update: “brown man”, having signed a confession (no doubt under duress of the zionist gestapo police) and convicted, naively, given the hopelessly rigged system, appeals to the Zionist supreme court, the chutzpah!

And here is where the details come to light. Here is the story.

First, what I think happened:

1. Brown man meets a “white” girl, though I think she is as “brown” as him (sephardi, to those familiar with the Zionist ethnicities);
2. “white/brown” girl is apparently troubled, she’s not a promiscuous JAP, but she agrees to go with the brown man to a secluded place – on the roof of an apartment building.
3. But she does not agree to full sexual intercourse; Brown man does not take “no” lightly, and roughens up the white/brown girl, undresses her, perhaps without too much tenderness or “romance” as in the blog post above, but rather against her will. To sweeten the pill, so to speak, brown man tells the white/brown girl that he is jewish (overlord) and single and that he wants a long term relations with the girl.
4. Having done the “romance” bit, brown man abandons white/brown girl naked on the roof – it isn’t clear but it is implied that he took her clothes (for memento of the romantic long-term relations that no doubt he meant) and flees.

Second, some facts:

1. White/brown girl, distraught, complains to the police – check on her body reveal minor bruises – this is a fact.
2. Brown man accused in court;
3. Prosecution decides that a minor charge of “rape by deception” (an old law on which even “overlords” were convicted before, a few times, oh the shame) is more likely to stand than a full rape charge;
4. Prosecution and Defence (yes, there is something like this in the Zionist apartheid state, even for brown people, unlike in South Africa under the honourable Richard “the black-whipping” Goldstone, mind you) agree that the romantic brown man will enter a plea, to avoid a much stiffer penalty for a full rape.
5. Brown man signs the plea (under duress of course) saying clearly that he deceived the white/brown girl and that this deception was what allowed him to have sexual intercourse with her;
6. Despite signing the plea, and without voicing any protests during court hearings (if the brown man was tortured by the Zionist Gestapo, for example), brown man, after conviction, breaks his signed-word and appeals.

So much for “impersonation”, “overlords” and “romance”. What happened was a “soft rape” and since it was difficult to prove, the prosecution entered a plea. This was transparent and open, it happens everywhere (in non-brown world at least). The accusation was under a law on which Jews were also convicted before.

So no racism, no romance, just a man intimidates a troubled woman into a soft rape. But in this case, the progressive liberals and feminists of this world are silent, I wonder why. Instead there are poisonous acusations of racism, and that mind you, when all the facts are in the light – despite the dark oppression of the white overlords…

Well now when the facts are clear, if the author of this blog has any self-esteem and honour, he owes an apology to the “overlords” for his innuendoes.

3 Yaniv Reich October 27, 2010 at 11:07 pm


I am pretty sure you do not really want to defend Israel’s behavior by comparing it to the shining kingdom of Saudi Arabia.

{ 3 trackbacks }

Previous post:

Next post: