5 ms·

I'm curious why PayPal bans Palestinians. It's not like they want to limit their addressable market. Seems likely related to OFAC, which is tough to google cas

I'm curious why PayPal bans Palestinians. It's not like they want to limit their addressable market. Seems likely related to OFAC, which is tough to google casually https://ofac.treasury.gov/sanctions-programs-and-country-information https://ofac.treasury.gov/sanctions-programs-and-country-inf... Nothing specific to Palestine on the country programs, but OFAC explains further that our sanctions are much more complicated than country-by-country here: https://ofac.treasury.gov/sanctions-programs-and-country-information/where-is-ofacs-country-list-what-countries-do-i-need-to-worry-about-in-terms-of-us-sanctions https://ofac.treasury.gov/sanctions-programs-and-country-inf...

bushbaba 3y ago
[flagged]
- willcipriano 3y ago
  > Palestinian government does pay its citizens if they kill an Israel in a suicide attack I assume Israel dosent provide any survivor benefits for it's soldiers?
  - gadders 3y ago
    I don't think it's contingent on them killing someone else.
  - bushbaba 3y ago
    these aren’t solders on either end. If a Palestinian non combatant resident kills an Israeli child. The Palestinian or their surviving family will get a payment. And yes, many Israeli children have been killed through such programs.
    - willcipriano 3y ago
      If a Israeli kills a Palestinian child (like this [0]) and is later killed himself, would his family receive survivorship benefits? If Palestinian fighting men aren't soldiers does that mean Israel is killing non combatants? [0]https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/eight-palestinian-children-killed-gaza-strip-last-night https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/eight-palestinian-chil...
      - kodah 3y ago
        Survivorship benefits are paid to survivors of a dead loved one. It sounds like OP is alleging that Palestinians can get paid for killing Israeli children. Those are very different ideas, I'm curious why you think that's a survivorship program. The UN and Geneva Convention define "combatant" and "non-combatant". Being uniformed is merely the ethical thing to do. Combatants also don't necessarily need to be armed, like in the case of spotters who have killed or mamed far more people than most folks realize, including civilians.
      - fnovd 3y ago
        I don't understand the confusion on this topic. One side will pay the family of a suicide bomber that murders innocent civilians, the other won't. It's not complicated. War is ugly, but as a global society we do have some idea about the difference between combat and terrorism. Firing rockets indiscriminately into a civilian area is not combat. Hiding your guns, bombs, and bases inside of civilian buildings is not some idle decision. The biggest losers of the Palestinian propaganda machine are the Palestinians themselves, and they are not the ones funding it. They are victims of this proxy war. It's a terrible situation, and it will continue to be terrible so long as it being a terrible situation is a precondition of the funding the terrorist governments receive. Hence, PayPal's ban.
        hutzlibu 3y ago
        "I don't understand the confusion on this topic. One side will pay the family of a suicide bomber that murders innocent civilians, the other won't. It's not complicated" Not complicated? Just compare the civilian casualties on both sides. Afaik they are way higher on the palestine side. When the IDF bombs a refugee camp, to take out one terrorist, they still consistently hit bystanders. And before the IDF was military dominant, plain terrorism from the israeli side happened as well: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre And still happens: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/27/israeli-settlers-rampage-after-palestinian-gunman-kills-two-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/27/israeli-settle... With every death, there is more demand for revenge. And the Hamas stand for revenge, which is why they are formally in power. I honestly don't know of a more complicated conflict.
  - fnovd 3y ago
    https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_...
bequanna 3y ago
Optics. In short, they don't want to appear to be funding terror. Please note, that isn't my personal opinion on the Palestinians.
slavboj 3y ago
[flagged]
x3874 3y ago
Preventing additional sources for financing state-sponsored terrorism, what is hard to understand?
- hgsgm 3y ago
  *this specific state.
danaris 3y ago
My guess is they don't want to piss off the Israeli government—or the elements in the US government who see blindly supporting Israel as an axiomatic good.

bushbaba 3y ago

[flagged]

willcipriano 3y ago
> Palestinian government does pay its citizens if they kill an Israel in a suicide attack I assume Israel dosent provide any survivor benefits for it's soldiers?
- gadders 3y ago
  I don't think it's contingent on them killing someone else.
- bushbaba 3y ago
  these aren’t solders on either end. If a Palestinian non combatant resident kills an Israeli child. The Palestinian or their surviving family will get a payment. And yes, many Israeli children have been killed through such programs.
  - willcipriano 3y ago
    If a Israeli kills a Palestinian child (like this [0]) and is later killed himself, would his family receive survivorship benefits? If Palestinian fighting men aren't soldiers does that mean Israel is killing non combatants? [0]https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/eight-palestinian-children-killed-gaza-strip-last-night https://www.unicef.org/press-releases/eight-palestinian-chil...
    - kodah 3y ago
      Survivorship benefits are paid to survivors of a dead loved one. It sounds like OP is alleging that Palestinians can get paid for killing Israeli children. Those are very different ideas, I'm curious why you think that's a survivorship program. The UN and Geneva Convention define "combatant" and "non-combatant". Being uniformed is merely the ethical thing to do. Combatants also don't necessarily need to be armed, like in the case of spotters who have killed or mamed far more people than most folks realize, including civilians.
    - fnovd 3y ago
      I don't understand the confusion on this topic. One side will pay the family of a suicide bomber that murders innocent civilians, the other won't. It's not complicated. War is ugly, but as a global society we do have some idea about the difference between combat and terrorism. Firing rockets indiscriminately into a civilian area is not combat. Hiding your guns, bombs, and bases inside of civilian buildings is not some idle decision. The biggest losers of the Palestinian propaganda machine are the Palestinians themselves, and they are not the ones funding it. They are victims of this proxy war. It's a terrible situation, and it will continue to be terrible so long as it being a terrible situation is a precondition of the funding the terrorist governments receive. Hence, PayPal's ban.
      - hutzlibu 3y ago
        "I don't understand the confusion on this topic. One side will pay the family of a suicide bomber that murders innocent civilians, the other won't. It's not complicated" Not complicated? Just compare the civilian casualties on both sides. Afaik they are way higher on the palestine side. When the IDF bombs a refugee camp, to take out one terrorist, they still consistently hit bystanders. And before the IDF was military dominant, plain terrorism from the israeli side happened as well: https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Deir_Yassin_massacre And still happens: https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/27/israeli-settlers-rampage-after-palestinian-gunman-kills-two-west-bank https://www.theguardian.com/world/2023/feb/27/israeli-settle... With every death, there is more demand for revenge. And the Hamas stand for revenge, which is why they are formally in power. I honestly don't know of a more complicated conflict.
- fnovd 3y ago
  https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_Fund https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Palestinian_Authority_Martyrs_...

bequanna 3y ago

Optics. In short, they don't want to appear to be funding terror. Please note, that isn't my personal opinion on the Palestinians.

slavboj 3y ago

[flagged]

x3874 3y ago

Preventing additional sources for financing state-sponsored terrorism, what is hard to understand?

hgsgm 3y ago
*this specific state.

danaris 3y ago

My guess is they don't want to piss off the Israeli government—or the elements in the US government who see blindly supporting Israel as an axiomatic good.